Airlines Are Starting to Take a Hit over TouchMyJunkGate

[rsmith6621]

.....I was reading an airline industry publication that is put out on a daily basis(I work in aviation)...unfortunately I could not forward it to myself no do any other copying of it to post it here on the DU....... anyhow the jist of the article said that airlines are receiving calls from passengers canceling their travels for next week and into Dec.....the article said that it is at around 4.5 and 6 percent for next week alone.


Yes DU....the people are speaking......and the airlines have no other choice but to refund their fares..... This folks could be a staycation holiday season.

Again my apologies for not being able to provide a link the article is not on the internet...

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. So best case scenario from actual pressure to Congress

will be a decrease in traffic, but seeing a flat season from same year last year is possible.

Thanks...

Will have to check travel numbers. I suspect that official face will be nothing to see here if the hit is not that bad.

:-)

Thank you very much, we will have to look at what the tone is, and how it starts to change. I mean they have gone from know your place to we are willing to listen, and reverted to hard core this morning with Pistole before Congress...

Readying tea leaves there is already pressure and a few are digging heels, while others are worried.

[awoke_in_2003]

83. no, the official face will be...

"it's the democrats fault" :)

[Frances]

2. I find it hard to believe that people can get their money

back just because they don't want to be searched unless they have bought a first class ticket. My husband cancelled some tickets last year and he just got a credit on a future ticket if he bought it in a year. He did have one first class ticket that was supposed to be refundable but it took months and at least 3 phone calls to actually get the money.

Personally, I think Fox news is flaming people's emotions so that the government doesn't do any checks and there will be a bomb incident in the air and Fox will then blame Obama and the Dems.

[LisaL]

5. Up till now they were doing pat downs without touching

people's crotches. How is touching people's crotches going to make everyone safe? Why all of the sudden did they decide they need to touch people's crotches for a proper pat down?
I feel like it's nothing more than dog and pony show.

[Ilsa]

64. The term I've been reading is "Security Theater". As long as

the cargo is largely unscreened, then what is the point of screening the passengers so thoroughly? Sure, the exploding underbelly might not bring down a skyscraper, but it'll certainly kill the 200-300 passengers.

[awoke_in_2003]

84. "How is touching people's crotches going to make everyone safe?"

you haven't seen my crotch :hide:

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. What they are doing don't work

and this is not FOX news, for once everybody who gets it, right, left, center, is united.

[avaistheone1]

20. You got that right.

Look at what is happening in New Jersey, the left and right lawmakers are coming together to change what TSA is doing.

People are mad as hell, and disparate groups are uniting and fighting together to get the TSA under control.

[rsmith6621]

11. John Tyner was issued a full refund....

....essentially all's a passenger has to say to the airlines is that they were not informed that they would be subjected to this kind of search and the airlines are forced to refund.... they mostly are doing this at this time to avoid a public relations nightmare....there is a time when the climate will change,I dont know when.

[druidity33]

51. but fined $10,000?

Is the fine going to stick? Last i heard they were still going to try and apply it and he was going to deny payment.

:shrug:

[northernlights]

28. I've never had trouble getting a full refund

not that I've flown in a long time.

As to Fox news flaming people's emotions? Just go to the site posted yesterday where people described their experiences. Or view the videos posted of the 3 year old and other child screaming while they're being groped.

Parents teach their children not to let strangers touch their private parts. And then the TSA forces them through what has to be, in their minds, torture while their parents look on helpless.

It doesn't take Fox News to creep people out over this gross, gross, gross violation of privacy. One reading of one description and I made a decision not to fly again until this country gets its head unscrewed. Soon it *will* be 1984 and we *will* all have cameras in every room all the time, with one set of people paid to watch over another. Better watch that sex -- after all, their could be a big-dick-bomber or an IUD bomber out there waiting to blow up that apartment building.

It's been years since the underwear bomber and the shoe bomber happened. No bombs went off. The takeaway *should* have been empowering. Instead, we're again turned into a bunch of sniveling cowards.

More people die each year in drunk driver accidents, from cancer, from all manner of other incidents, then in all the terr'ist acts combined (leaving out, of course, our *own* terrorist bombing of Iraq, Afghanistan and whereever).

What a bunch of sniveling cowards this country is. Frankly, it's disgusting and an embarrassment.

[kayakjohnny]

54. That was a very good post.

You packed a lot into a short space.

And I agree with every word, especially that last sentence.

Thanks.

[awoke_in_2003]

85. "sniveling cowards this country is"

home of the brave, indeed. I have a better chance of getting struck by lighting, but that doesn't stop me from going out in the rain.

[WolverineDG]

34. I don't mind the screening, it's the sexual assault I don't care for

I'm toying with the idea of bringing my own rape kit, since the only people I've ever allowed to touch me "down there" were either working in the medical field or bought me dinner first.

dg

[Bill McBlueState]

38. there's an idea

Maybe if a TSA agent bought me lunch in the food court first, I'd be more tolerant of this.

[customerserviceguy]

59. Maybe this is just an issue where the right and the left can agree

Having the TSA jackboots do whatever they want to do, while they have zero chance of ever catching any real terrorists, is just the tipping point for enough Americans to question the assumptions made in the wake of 9/11.

The only attempted terrorist incidents in recent years involved those who came in from overseas, once you're in the 'bubble' of pre-screened airport space, you're immune to further checks. This is how the Christmas underwear bomber managed to toast his own chestnuts, and it proves the system is only as strong as the weakest Third World airport.

Groping nuns and three year olds who are flying from Wichita to Grand Rapids doesn't make anybody safer, and common sense is already on to that fact.

[Liquorice]

3. I am very uncomfortable with the way airlines are handling security.

I don't want to be run through a full body x-ray machine or be violated with a creepy body search from a screener. My husband and I decided not to fly this year.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. This is not the airlines

though they pay for some of this.

It is TSA, part of the Federal Government, Department of Homeland Security...

And this was first done during the Bush administration...

[Liquorice]

8. Well okay, to be clear, I'm uncomfortable with the way TSA is handling security at airports. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. Not only you, and we fully agree

:hi:

If you want to "worry" predictably the Repubs want to re-privatize it. And while I am a critic, their security is actually an improvement over pre -911 days. They have gotten a lot of it wrong... and there are definite room for improvement. (Which does not include gropes or rapiscan machines)

[Liquorice]

16. It would be terrible if the repubs get their way and it is re-privatized. I do hope TSA

makes changes to the current situation. If not, I worry that it's just a matter of time before they come up with an automated scanning/groping machine that takes nude pictures of you WHILE you are being mechanically groped. :D

[Walk dont run]

25. Who runs TSA?

I can't believe any govt agency(except for the dept of motor vehicles) could be so insensitive to the public. Who is the HEAD of TSA and HLS? Must be Bush leftovers.

[nadinbrzezinski]

68. Department of Homeland Security

the guy in charge is Mr. Pistole, if you know Italian you will get the joke in the name... and he answers to Secretary Napolitano.

part of the problem is not the front line worker, but training, supervision, and these things started under the Bush Administration...

[awoke_in_2003]

86. well, police departments...

are local government, and FBI are federal- they are not known for their sensitivity.

[tavalon]

27. I must disagree with you

There has rarely been a safer way to get around than flying and we are just as safe as we were on Sept 10 or the 15th. We continue not to scan cargo, where a bomb is most likely to actually be harbored and continue to play security theater (therefore, it isn't about security but about looking secure - security theater). I think TSA is befuddled that we've finally said, enough! If this were actually helpful, it isn't, I might be willing to support medically untested backscatter Xray machines but as it stands, no go, not even for enhanced security theater. That dog or pony has to go.

There is nothing (other than mass cargo scans for usps, ups and DHL) that needs to be added. None of the stupidity already in place will ever go away and that's too bad but nothing more needs to be added on the passenger side.

[nadinbrzezinski]

47. They are scanning some cargo

Which they weren't No 20% is not good enough by any stretch. Yet it is better than zero.

They are using some dogs and a few chemical sniffers...

Why I said we are slightly better...

After that, to board a plane it is theater, it is reactive, not pro active.

And I don't blame worker bees but top layers of the government. They offered advise, but since we're the us, exceptionalism lives on, we said no.

[nadinbrzezinski]

69. They are scanning about 20% of the cargo

they have "corrected" some of the issues with Preferred Shipping AFTER the last incident... again we react, are not proactive.

Before 9.11 I took a 6 inch rescue knife to the plane when we took a patient to an AA flight, I had to leave my boots behind, but I had a rescue knife and my trauma shears on me. I am willing to bet dime on dollar that would not happen today... As stupid as the system is, I am betting they'd keep that... and my radio. I call that a huge improvement, actually. And I am a critic.

[tavalon]

104. Really, why do you see that as an improvement?

At the risk of having this whole topic move to the dungeon, you don't really think those folks really took those planes with box cutters do you? Or that their passports conveniently hit the ground when all else was pulverized? I'm reminded of the first gulf war when they tried to use psyops on us by showing the Iraqi's blowing up a baby milk factory. Of course, it said Baby Milk Factory in English on the side. I'm not a blithering idiot and neither are you. Apparently, the powers that be think most of us are and the TSA theater is a fine example.

There is nothing they are doing that is anything but theater, theater and lining Chertoff and other Bush cronies pockets. If none of the theater were there, you and I would be just as safe getting on a plane. We would be in more danger driving to and from the airport. Please don't give them cover. I know you know better.

We aren't safer, we're being primed for fascism. The airport is where they are getting us used to it. Just as protests are now getting countermeasures. If they move too fast we push back.

[AsahinaKimi]

55. I won't fly...

and I hope there is a huge boycott, with the holiday season coming up. Besides, with unemployment being high, who can afford to fly?

[avaistheone1]

21. But now it is continuing

with the Obama administration. Once again where is the change, especially about acts by TSA, a government agency, that are useless and offensive to most of us.

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. It is not tsa, but what they do

It is management. And I will not defend Obama for the theater, in case you are accusing me of this.

[whathehell]

53. There was a good discussion of this on Thom Hartmann this afternoon...

Apparently this is Bush holdover Michael Chernoff's idea..and he's making lots of money off it.


Thom was comparing it to Israel's security (which doesn't use these freaking machines) and saying how much more expensive (and less effective) this is.

When a caller asked why we weren't using something like El Al's security measures, which include interviews and chemical sniffing dogs, he said "Because nobody gets RICH off their security practices...They're all civil servants"!

He's probably right.

I'm not going through that effing radiation machine...I don't like the pat down much, but I'd prefer that if I have to fly, and I do, occasionally.:mad:

[Beartracks]

72. "more expensive (and less effective)" - The American Way.

Just like our healthcare system!

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

[Beartracks]

75. "more expensive (and less effective)" - The American Way.

Just like our healthcare system!

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

[notesdev]

4. Don't taze my junk bro

also, people are probably happy to have a reason to feel good about not spending the money to travel this year.

[TexasObserver]

10. Refusing to fly is the best way to exert pressure.

The airlines and the businesses which depend upon air travel can put pressure on government individuals cannot.

From a political standpoint, this is another embarrassment to the president.

[LibDemAlways]

52. Agree 100%. Politicians do not pay attention to ordinary people. However

the airlines rely on ordinary people to stay in business. When enough people refuse to buy tickets because they refuse to be sexually assaulted before boarding an aircraft the airlines will insist the government do something. The economic weapon is our only weapon. I hope people have the common sense to use it.

[SoCalDemGrrl]

12. My family has agreed to boycott the airlines til the TSA comes to their senses

We have no assurance that the full body scans are free of skin cancer risks as
some scientists suspect AND

these "full body pat downs including touching the groin and private parts" are unacceptable

Soooooo - my family is opting for vacations where we can drive and/or take Amtrack.

All sensible Americans should boycott the airlines until the TSA treats us with decency and common sense.

Hit them in the pocket book and make a difference

[Sirveri]

13. You take a radiation dose every time you fly.

Less atmosphere between you and the sun. You also take a dose every time you go down a freshly paved street. I wouldn't really worry about rad doses from these things unless you fly a lot, like at least once a week. Which is why the pilots and stewardesses are advised not to use them.

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. Read my sig

Goes beyond just rad doses

[Sirveri]

18. I agree with that. I hate that aspect of it.

But the rad dose is a non-starter. Honestly they crossed the line when they started telling people to take their shoes off and that they could bring a sealed can of soda past the gate.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. The shoes they could make a case

But the problem is that like with everything else it is reactive and useless...theater really.

[bluetrain]

22. You're wrong about the radiation for a fistful of reasons all of which have already been

discussed on this board. If you look at the math, a passenger will get cancer from one of these machines every 15 to 20 days.

[Sirveri]

32. That's a great unsourced statement. I'll trust my actual experience as a radiation worker instead.

You take more from a 7 hour flight than you do from these machines (.03mSv > .0004mSv). Oh, you say the dose is 20x higher, it's still less (.03mSv > .008mSv). If it goes any higher it won't do what it's supposed to do, because it will return images from inside the body instead. Radiation isn't scary, we're exposed to it from the sun, our houses, the roads we pave, etc our entire life. Our species is somewhat resilient to low levels of radiation, a perfect example is the above ground nuclear tests china conducted in Sinkiang which dumped fallout all over the continental US.

[avaistheone1]

23. Scientists state these particular machines are suspect in terms of causing skin cancer.

Anyone with cancer or who has a history of skin cancer should stay away from these machines.




Scientists Warn Naked Body Scanners May Cause Cancer
"They say the risk is minimal, but statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays," says a John Hopkins University doctor.
November 14, 2010

WASHINGTON — US scientists warned Friday that the full-body, graphic-image X-ray scanners that are being used to screen passengers and airline crews at airports around the country may be unsafe.

"They say the risk is minimal, but statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays," Dr Michael Love, who runs an X-ray lab at the department of biophysics and biophysical chemistry at Johns Hopkins University school of medicine, told AFP.

"No exposure to X-ray is considered beneficial. We know X-rays are hazardous but we have a situation at the airports where people are so eager to fly that they will risk their lives in this manner," he said.

The possible health dangers posed by the scanners add to passengers and airline crews' concerns about the devices, which have been dubbed "naked" scanners because of the graphic image they give of a person's body, genitalia and all.

http://www.alternet.org/rights/148849/scientists_warn_naked_body_scanners_may_cause_cancer/

[Sirveri]

35. And other scientists disagree with them.

I just read 2 articles stating that the radiation risk was negligible.
Here's one: http://www.diagnosticimaging.com/safety/article/113619/1537426
and another: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60553920100106

Isn't google awesome! I'm a former radiation worker, we take plenty of cosmic radiation every day, it's not a big deal. Run with the 4th amendment rights angle, this one is a non-starter. Unless you just want to scare people by saying radiation when the majority of people are totally clueless as to what radiation actually is.

[arikara]

49. 2 words

Precautionary Principle.

Scientists are often wrong. Funnily enough, especially the ones paid by industry, or hoping to be paid by industry.

[Sirveri]

58. 1 word. Fear.

I'm sure while you're so terrified about radiation you have no problems getting into your car and driving around, which has a higher risk of killing you than these scanners ever will. Even if you don't drive you have a higher probability of getting hit by a car than getting killed by radiation from one of these machines.

[awoke_in_2003]

87. "1 word. Fear"

great sentence- you are so terrified of a terra attack that you are willing to submit yourself to equipment that has not been fully studied, or having you junk groped by some authoritarian thug. Oh, but the people who question this shit are the people who are really scared :eyes:

[frylock]

90. the ironing is delicous

[awoke_in_2003]

92. well thank you...

I used a lot of starch :)

[Sirveri]

93. Except I've repeatedly said I don't support the use of these machines.

Not because of any supposed radiation health effects, but because it's an invasion of our civil liberties.

[awoke_in_2003]

99. I did catch the "Invasion of our civil liberties"...

and applaud that, but I don't think we should soft sell the unknowns of the health effects. We probably won't know for years down the road- but why expose people unnecessarily? Truthfully, I think it is nothing but a dog and pony show to keep people scared, while the rich continue to plunder the treasury- but that is just my opinion.

[Sirveri]

103. That's the real issue, be afraid (and spend money on my useless junk product).

It IS a dog and pony show. Yes, I have to throw my sealed can of soda away, because it might be a secret bomb! Even though it's not big enough to actually take down the plane, and it went thru the scanner, and I'm willing to drink it in front of you... But no, apparently I have to spend 3 dollars inside the airport for the same product... Security, yeah right.

The reason I harp so bad on the radiation thing is because I prefer our arguments to be solid and air tight. Appeal to fear isn't really a good argument IMO when talking about this type of stuff on either side.

[frylock]

89. and what are the odds of getting exploded in an airplane by a bomb taped under someone's balls?

does that fall somewhere in between getting killed in a car or dosed with rads?

[Sirveri]

95. Pretty much zero. TSA is security theater, which I've said repeatedly.

I think it's stupid to waste money on these machines, that said I also would prefer us to argue from a position of true legitimacy. The radiation health effects are overblown and non-existent.

[tavalon]

57. Thank you for the articles. Now, as a fellow medical professional

I'm going to make a bit of a complaint about them. Neither disclosed whether these people had any financial ties to the companies in question. I expect that upfront in any "scientific" article I read (realizing, these have been sanitized for the public. I know this because my eyes didn't begin to glaze at the abstract. There were no abstracts, come to think of it)

[customerserviceguy]

61. I'll admit, it was a concern of mine

But your words are reassuring. I only fly two or three round trips a year, would you say that the possible risk of skin cancer was very minimal? Keep in mind, I was born in Canada, and can get a sunburn if I spend too long looking in the refrigerator for a beer.

[Sirveri]

102. It's all about statistics with radiation.

Could you develop skin cancer from these machines, sure, anything is possible, however the possibility of getting killed on your way to the airport is MUCH higher. Basically the risk is very low, but the more you take, the more likely you will get a negative effect. That doesn't mean you shouldn't still take the risk however. Right now, if you want to avoid the grope fest, and you don't fly often, use the scanners. If you're paranoid about radiation, don't use them (but you're gonna get groped right now)! I don't care really, I'm just sick of this big radiation bogey man that keeps getting tossed around as a scare tactic.

I just hope they stop pissing our money away on stupid security theater.

[customerserviceguy]

106. Thanks, I appreciate that

The only reason I fly is because I feel like visiting my family and friends on the West Coast a couple of times a year, and it's just too long of a drive to fit it into a vacation week. My lady and I did a trip to the Midwest a couple of weeks ago, and were able to use just three days of vacation along with the Vet's Day holiday and the previous weekend to travel through five states, four of which we had never spent the night in together.

I'll go for the scanner, since I visit a clothing-optional beach on my July trips out West, I really don't give a damn if someone thinks that a ghostly image of me nekkid is a turn on. Thanks for your advice!

[liberation]

67. Who to believe, a random anonymous "radiation worker" or a UCSF Nobel Price winner...

... that's a tough one, not.

LOL

[ProudDad]

78. I agree -- it's a HORRIBLE violation of the 4th Amendment...

Hell, half of what the Imperial Security Forces do are violations of the 4th Amendment...

The Founding Fathers must be spinning in their graves...

[tsuki]

26. The company did testing under optimum conditions in the laboratory.

They did no testing on old machines, defective machines or poorly maintained machines. They have no idea of how leakage from the machine will effect airport personnel or bystanders. They won't know for a number of years. Is it worth it to keep Skeletor in bones?

[Sirveri]

31. If there is leakage it will be the same dose as to the person inside.

In addition it would likely be treated as a point source, and decay at an exponential rate from the point of origin (making it dramatically lower after 3 feet). They also won't leak when inactive since they are most likely similar to modern x-ray equipment that uses an electronic charge to activate a material to emit photons at the desired intensity.

[tsuki]

36. Ah yes, it is all perfectly safe for long time exposure, just like

asbestos, radium on watch dials, mercury for fur curing, exposure to agent orange, cigarettes, dispersants in the Gulf, ground zero air. Why, because the government and corporations told us so.

[MattSh]

43. +10,000 n/t

[Sirveri]

56. Except we have 50+ years of data about ionizing radiation.

And over 100 years about x-rays and other medical exposure. This isn't the 1950's anymore, if it was your statement would have more relevance. But hey, if you want to be afraid of the dose from these, then I guess you're not going to drive down a freshly paved street, or go to the dentist, or get on a flight. Because the radiation is just so scary.

[tsuki]

77. You are working very hard to prove that radiation is A-Okay, but I

have a question. If radiation is A-Okay, why were x-ray machines taken out of the shoe departments in the 50's? Why do the technicians who take your x-rays wear lead aprons, and move behind a screen? Because it is scary...right.

[Sirveri]

82. Because they're exposed to it much more than the traditional person.

As for the 1950's machines, those were gimmicks that were basically useless, because you don't need a foot x-ray to get shoes. In addition modern machines don't function in the way that those did. Like anything, too much is generally bad. Too much oxygen increases flammability and can cause burns. Too much water can kill or drown a person. We take in radiation on a daily basis, minor amounts don't cause the end of the world. I'll provide a link to a decent report which basically explains radiation in layman's terms. It's from the UN, so it's pretty viable.
http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/09-86753_Report_2008_GA_Report.pdf

[liberation]

66. The radiation from a focused bean of X-rays...

... and the random cosmic ray hitting you are two very different phenomena.

Never mind that last I checked people tend to fly on enclosed airliners made of aluminum...

[Sirveri]

91. You apparently don't understand physics, or the electromagnetic spectrum.

High energy gamma will go through thin aluminum like it's not even there. The main method of shielding on the surface of the earth is the thickness and density of the atmosphere(the magnetosphere does stuff too, but it's not relevant to this discussion). When you remove 30 thousand feet worth of shielding you get a significantly higher dose. While you're correct that the angle of approach from the rays matters, it only matters for material absorption because it changes the effective width of the material. This makes it more likely to be absorbed from an angle than from a straight shot. Finally the primary form of radiation from cosmic emissions is high energy gamma ray, which is simply a higher frequency and more intense photon than an X-ray. Below x-ray is ultra violet, followed by visible light, followed by infrared, followed by radio.

[Xithras]

37. I'm driving the family to Portland next month for the holidays

Knowing my protectiveness of my kids, I'm pretty sure I'd end up a headline on CNN once I saw the guards feeling up my 17 year old daughters boobs, or grabbing my 6 year old sons junk. I have ahuge problem with the idea of them doing it to ME. No way I'd impose that on THEM.

Better to pile in the car.

[Historic NY]

15. No unwanted groping on the train.

[LisaL]

17. You can't get everywhere you need to get on the train.

[BadgerKid]

39. And if you can, it may take twice as long as driving.

Perhaps intra-east coast timetables are more efficient.

[Ikonoklast]

46. Sure about that?

Mi Scusi!

[Hardrada]

24. I am staying home (or driving an hour or so) for Christmas.

I have better things to do than to have strangers fondle my privy parts. In spring I may consider going Amtrak.

[Greyhound]

29. If one didn't know better, one might conclude that our government

is deliberately destroying this nation. From refusing to even discuss any policy choices that don't include massive subsidies to mega corporations to bone-headed schemes like the TSA in general and the current idiocy, you just have to wonder what the hell are they thinking and where do they think it will lead?

[dgibby]

40. I've been thinking that for a long time.

I think it has to do with globalization and the international moneyed entities behind that. Those people have no allegiance to country, only the bottom line. It's a blood sport with them, and it's our blood they're shedding.

[ProudDad]

79. Naw, just "unintended consequences"

of unbridled corporate capitalism...

The Frontiers of Private Enterprise...

[awoke_in_2003]

88. our government is made up of pawns...

there are people destroying this nation, and they all reside on wall street. Wall Street runs the show, DC is just a Potemkin Village used to keep up the facade of democracy (the first person who says "we are a republic" can bite me- democracy was commonly used in place of the word republic, at least until republicans bought a dictionary).

[MadHound]

30. Good, threaten their bottom line,

Then they will put pressure on Congress and the WH to have things changed. Lord knows, corporate voices speak louder in DC than human ones, maybe this will get things changed.

[LibDemAlways]

42. + 1000. Well said.

At the hearing with Pistole yesterday Kay Bailey Hutchinson of Texas looked particularly pissed off. I'm sure she's already heard from the heads of Continental, Southwest, and American. The last thing a politician wants is an unhappy corporation.

The only weapon the public has to fight this shit is economic. The government doesn't give a flying fuck about us. The politicians do care - bigtime - about corporate bottom lines.

[JohnyCanuck]

101. "The government doesn't give a flying fuck about us."

Now ain't that the truth. So many people still haven't figured that out.

[seabeyond]

108. my MIL wanted me to fly to cape cod. told her, no, we would drive. she wanted me to fly

to SF. told her, no, we would drive. now she wants me to fly to new orleans. told her, no, we would drive. she is really pissed at me because of lack of parking, and having to deal with my car. no, we will drive. closest place yet, and we will drive.

i refuse to give the airlines my money to be placed in a prison environment. i dont break the laws and a huge reason, is i dont ever want to experience loss of rights, and prison environment. that is what the airlines have done.

i stopped giving them my money a long time ago.

it took naked scanners, and groping crotches before people were concerned about their rights, as simple human beings. and even with this, there are still so many people willing to place themselves in subservient, submissive role. i dont know how to be that person. it is as foriegn to me as a passive, timid person being aggressive. people say, submit and it is all easy. i can't

[WolverineDG]

33. I'm not looking forward to being sexually assaulted in December

but I have no choice but to fly to Seattle for Christmas. Coming home, though, the bus is looking like a better option.

dg

[sarcasmo]

63. Boycott TSA take the bus and let the airline know why you are taking the bus.

[slackmaster]

41. I won't fly until all physical contact stops.

The only reason I'd make an exception would be for a family emergency, or an opportunity to get lots of money from a Nigerian barrister.

[hatrack]

44. This was only a matter of time . . .

The general absurdity of TSA procedures (3 ounces of hand sanitizer permissible, 4 ounces . . . Ooh! Too much!) and on and on and on was pretty much on the tips of everyone's tongues.

The Junk Shot procedure, though, is just that last little nudge that the whole complex needed for people to start shouting "Bullshit!"

And once that particular toothpaste is out of the tube, it's hard to get it back in.

Provided it doesn't total more than four ounces, of course.

[customerserviceguy]

60. Well stated

And amusing in the process. We've reached a tipping point here. Who will respond first, the President or the Repukes?

[Generic Brad]

70. This could be a huge issue for the president

What is being done is flat out wrong. He needs to stand up for us from his bully pulpit, join his voice with ours and demand "ENOUGH!" If the head of the TSA won't back down, he needs to demand his resignation.

I desperately want President Obama to stand up for all of us.

[customerserviceguy]

71. Me, too

But it's been awhile since he used that kind of voice. He seems to have entered a 'go along, get along' kind of mode lately.

[Uncle Joe]

45. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, rsmith.

[Jim__]

50. Glad to hear it. I hope the cancellations increase. - n/t

[sarcasmo]

62. Don't want to mess with you're job but a boycott is needed to tamper down the TSA goons.

[madrchsod]

65. i have no where to fly to and if i did i`d drive.

[Quantess]

73. I plan to fly international in the next couple of months.

Nice to know I could get fingered and groped by an unattractive stranger. In any other situation, it's called sexual assault.

[shanti]

74. power to the people!

:thumbsup:

[haifa lootin]

76. The airlines are NOT the driving force behind all this TSA bullshit.

They would rather handle it themselves (and would do as good as if not better than the TSA clowns)

[nadinbrzezinski]

96. Hmm no they would not

When private security got this gig I got a six inch blade into a plane....

I posted an OP by the way, also in my journal. but here you go

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9588182

Those of us who still have a memory remember stuff like this...

[haifa lootin]

105. Before 9/11 so it is completely irrelevant.

Back then security was a little hit and mostly miss.
\

[Mosaic]

80. Good news

I flew all over the world in the 80's and 90's. I wouldn't fly now if you paid me.

[Rex]

81. Some people don't want to get groped or sexually humiliated by

a faceless govt branch bot...who can blame them. I'm sure this stupid 'show of force' by our gummit will cost the taxpayer billions (in future bailout money). Why the stupid? Oh right our continuing failure in the 'war on terror', kinda like our 'war on drugs'.

Teh stupid huuurrrts!

[Contrary1]

94. I'm waiting for the story that's bound to come soon:

The infant that is "patted down" because a parent refuses to let him be x-rayed. I predict all hell will break loose.

[LisaL]

97. Why do you think a hell will break lose?

TSA doesn't deny they pat down children.
Although they now say they will used a "modified" pat down on children, they refuse to say what exactly is modified.
"Are children exempt for pat-downs at airport security? Not according to one man who says a TSA employee groped 6 year-old son at Charlotte Douglas International Airport."
http://www.wbtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=13526724

[LisaL]

107. In order to be x-rayed, someone has to be albe to stand up

with hands raised. An infant would not be able to stand up with hands raised, thus the infant can not be x-rayed, so presumably infants would have to be patted down if they are selected for special screening.

[jonthebru]

98. The terriblists are winning unless we fight back and not be terrible.

[Warren DeMontague]

100. ***