T Nation

TSA Encounter at SAN


#1

http://johnnyedge.blogspot.com/2010/11/these-events-took-place-roughly-between.html

If you refuse to walk through the new Backscatter X ray machines, you will be subject to a search involving touching your genitals. This amounts to government sanctioned sexual harassment. When this guy refused and was told to be escorted from the airport by security, he was THEN told he was liable for a $10,000 civil suit for not allowing them to complete the search. He got it all on video/audio from his cell phone.

Our tax dollars hard at work stripping our liberties away more and more every day. Pretty soon, we won't have ANY real freedom left.


#2

Can you at least request a chick to do the pat down? Or, aren't those highly elite ninjas of justice known as the TSA taking requests?


#3

How else are you are going to be conditioned to unflinchingly submit to authority?

On the bright side, if you just let them X-ray you, someone is bound to develop superpowers.


#4

This sucks.
I don't think however the whole system is set up so that somebody can touch your wiener.
Some jackass from Somalia tried to blow up a plane here in Detroit a year or so ago.
He had explosives up his ass basically lol.


#5

No, the whole touching your wiener part is to make you submit to being x-rayed.

At least according to a former TSA employee:

http://relaxedfocus.blogspot.com/2010/11/what-tsa-screeners-really-think-of-you.html


#6

I would also like to add that flying is a privilege, yes, but not a privilege granted by the government, if such a thing even were possible.

It is a privilege granted by an airline, in return for a fee, just like McDonalds grants you the privilege of a hamburger once you pay their fee.

There is no really reason for a government to enter into this types of contracts.


#7

And now, like in every case of airport security before that, gradually culminating in our present circumstances, and with who-knows-what to come, we have to be subjected to a system of "security" that is all show and no go, that actually ends up making us progressively less and ever less safe. Because it is always reactive and it is always hamstrung by the most absurd political correctness. So, instead of keeping up-to-date no-fly lists and USING THEM, instead of screening prudently with added scrutiny for passengers from countries known to harbor terrorists, instead of screening prudently with added scrutiny for passengers whose actions, circumstances, or physical traits raise more suspicious flags than those of, say, a 60 year old asian woman; we are left with the current cluster-fuck of a "security" situation.

Now, oh miracle of inefficiency, the TSA must screen ALL of the passengers who pass through security checkpoints with the same amount of heavily increased security, increasing their workload and vastly increasing the chances that someone, the real one they are supposed to be looking for, is going to slip through no matter how many pubic hair inspecting machines or equivalent personnel in any given airport. Now, because of "profiling" restrictions, the TSA must truly randomly select people for inspections, so that it becomes just a matter of numbers and time before somebody gets through with something really bad while an agent is busy subjecting yet another 50-something yuppie WASP to a body cavity search without his having ever committed any sort of wrongdoing whatsoever, without even the typical probable cause that a law enforcement officer, up to now, has always been required to have.

Security is a fucking joke at airports. My own brother was a TSA agent for a few years, and he has told me first hand what a fucking joke it is. One of the primary reasons he quit was that he just could not work there any longer without feeling he was sacrificing his integrity in doing so, as it is nothing more than a dog-and-pony show.

Meanwhile, we are the proverbial frogs in the pot. For the past ten years, they've been turning up the heat, warmer and warmer. For those who've regularly used airports, particularly international airports, over the past ten years, think back on what security used to be like. How long did you have to wait? Do you remember in, say, the '90s even, ever, ever, ever having to make sure to show up at an airport two to three hours before your flight left just to catch your flight?

I certainly wish there was a lot MORE outrage at this bullshit. I hope the above article is the first of many, many, many more to come. Something needs to change, and it aint the addition of yet another fancy, invasive, borderline scandalous "security" device.

[/rant]


#8

Since my suggestions whatelse terrorists might too even if TSA employess were even able to find weapons and explosives, which they have proven not to be able too, let us just say that anyone with half a brain can do quite a lot of damage outside of commercial transportation.


#9

I left it out because it was too long already, but I was going to mention this same thing.

If I was a terrorist, I'd opt for blowing up a train or a well positioned subway car just to avoid all of the damned lines and waiting I have to put up with at the airport.


#10

With all of the options available to them, I'm surprised they were still going the airport route as late as the panty bomber guy. Except that, I guess, they know they still can!


#11

I agree - them being afraid of being blamed for "profiling" is increasing TSA's inefficiency.
The question is - would you rather let some TSA employee see everyone's crack on an X-ray screen and maybe (lol) catch someone with explosives "in their underwear" or limit what TSA can do in favor of privacy vs. security ?


#12

A French intelligence service regularily runs drills to find out what they can smuggle unto a plane.

I am pretty sure that they could get a small elephant passed the TSA.

As for why they still try to use planes, either they are morons or they liek the challenge.


#13

The worst part there is very little respect on the part of the TSA. At least give everyone a punch card, where after every 5 screenings you get a reach around or a kiss on the cheek. At the 50 screening level, you get a statuette of a golden glove. You can look at it on your mantle and fondly remember how some stranger with a GED almost stopped himself from laughing as the back of his hand slid between those beefy quads of yours.


#14

a terrorist could be dangerous even if he hasn't smuggling anything unto the plane.
this X-Ray thing is not enough
they should actually waterboard each and every passenger before letting them in.

starting with white grannies
cause we ALL know that Al Qaeda is currently busy converting and training hundreds of white grannies around the world.


#15

And three year olds, do not forget three year olds.

Fondling their genitals really is not enough, I think cavity searches are in order.


#16

For every fancy new intrusive machine they create to solve the problem of people bringing "bad" stuff onto the plane, a new problem is simultaneously created via the law of unintended consequences. Think about it: Guns and knives were screened for, so what did the 9-11 hijackers use? Boxcutters. Well, they outlawed those. Not to worry, along came Richard Reid with C-4 tucked neatly into his shoes. Now we have to remove our shoes (only at American airports, ime). So then what, you think they're gonna put it in their shoes again? Of course now. Next, we had the guy bringing separate liquid components and trying to mix them on the plane to create an explosion. What happened as a result of that? Do you remember? Yeah, I remember every time I have to go and buy a bunch of bullshit travel sized toiletries specifically for use on the plane and make certain they fit into my sandwich baggie. But wait, there's more! After this, no one bothered with the liquid method anymore, the next guy (that I can think of) stuffed the C-4 into his pretty little Victoria's Secret low-rise bottoms. The reaction: genital inspections.

The point is, none, not ONE of the attempted (thank God) terrorist attacks that occurred after the prior measures had been taken was anything like the one before. Now, you can take one point of view and say that it's working. And I'll say that it's "working" about as well as crushing a single cockroach in your kitchen and saying, "There now, that takes care of that."

The entire system is broken. Massively, preposterously broken. False dichotomies aside, I would "rather" the TSA looked for the people who are most likely to be terrorists, stopped them at their checkpoints, followed certain protocols to disinterestedly determine if each person deserved further screening or detention, and let the vast majority of the populace, many of whom clearly have no business being screened for anything but diverticulitis or seborrheic dermatitis, get to watching Everybody Loves Raymond and complaining about how they miss the peanuts.


#17

Searching for explosives (or toxins or whatever) is stupid. They are too easy to hide, and there are too many other ways to take down a plane.

If you want to take down a plane in the middle of the Atlantic, go buy a couple of bottles of high proof vodka at the duty free store on the other side of security, add some Ivory Snow soap chips, a rag, and ignite with a strike-anywhere camping match you jammed in your hoochie. Two or three guys come out of the Lavs in concert would take down any plane, smashing the Molotovs in concert.

In Israel we search for terrorists. It's a much more effective screeening tool.


#18

Oh we are on our way.

Except, or course there will be certain groups who are exempt from the waterboarding process. Because we wouldn't want to like, hurt anybody's feelings or, God forbid, discriminate.


#19

three year olds should be able to form at least basic sentences.
they can confess they are terrorists, and should be waterboarded too.


#20

Jewbacca, yours was the exact country I had in mind as I was typing.

Would you mind letting us in on just a little bit about how airport security works in Israel? I'd love to hear it.