I really think there is a super credible threat now and that is why

[Maraya1969]

they are doing all this searching at the airport. Do you really think they are planning on implementing this forever? Also the holidays are coming and that is a dangerous time.

[Cleobulus]

1. There's always a threat. So why not make this permanent? n/t

[leftstreet]

2. The only threat is union organization of 50,000+ employees

Oh, and the threat of not grabbing more public money into private hands

FLRA Accepts AFGE Petition for Union Election at TSA

WASHINGTON, Nov. 12, 2010 /PRNewswire-USNewswire
The Federal Labor Relations Authority today accepted the petition from the American Federation of Government Employees to hold a union election at the Transportation Security Administration.

"AFGE argued, and the FLRA agreed, that the right for employees to elect an exclusive representative and the right to engage in collective bargaining are two separate and distinct rights," AFGE National President John Gage said. "We have always said the choice to unionize and the task of winning collective bargaining rights at TSA would be a two-part process.

"While we wait for the decision on collective bargaining rights that TSA Administrator Pistole has indicated will come soon, the election process can begin to move forward," Gage added. "TSOs have waited long enough for both formal representation in the workplace and for the same collective bargaining rights held by Border Patrol and Federal Protective Service officers, ICE agents, FEMA employees, DoD civilians—as well as those screening officers that work for TSA contractors.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/flra-accepts-afge-petition-for-union-election-at-tsa-107570868.html

TSA to hold union election

By Emily Long November 12, 2010

Transportation Security Administration employees soon will be able to vote for exclusive union representation.

The Federal Labor Relations Authority on Friday accepted a petition from the American Federation of Government Employees and the National Treasury Employees Union to hold an election to determine which group will represent TSA workers. Petitions filed by AFGE and NTEU earlier this year were denied by an FLRA regional official, but Friday's decision reverses that ruling. Both unions have been vying for exclusive representation of 40,000 TSA employees. FLRA will set the timeline for the election, count the votes and certify the results.

AFGE National President John Gage praised the decision, arguing Transportation Security officers have waited too long for union representation.

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/111210l3.htm

TSA Is 'Far Behind The Curve' On Security, Lawmaker Says

NPR NewsBlog 11/22/2010
While the Transportation Security Administration says there's reason behind its new security processes at airports, the Republican congressman who's in line to become chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee says the agency is behind the times when it comes to protecting Americans.

"What they're doing really doesn't even address the current threat," Rep. John Mica, R-FL, told All Things Considered co-host Melissa Block this afternoon. Pat-downs and body scans of travelers might catch some of the would-be bombers of past years, Mica said, but won't stop terrorists intent on putting bombs on cargo planes.

Mica is an advocate of making more use of private contractors to do the screening and security work at airports. Melissa noted, as has Fox News, that Mica has come under some criticism because contributors to his campaigns have included companies that might benefit from such work. Mica called such talk "a lot of malarkey":

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/11/22/131517640/tsa-is-far-behind-the-curve-on-security-lawmaker-says

Traveler Anger Has Some Cities Considering Private Screeners

POSTED: 8:06 pm MST November 20, 2010

DENVER -- One city councilman in Colorado Springs is so fed up with new TSA security procedures he's ready to ask about switching to private contractors.

"I think we're kind of reaching a tipping point in this country right now," said Sean Paige, Colorado Springs city councilman. "Americans are tired of being treated like cattle and criminals every time they go out to the airport. We all understand the need for security, but I think we could do it with more dignity and more respect."

Paige said he'll ask airport managers to explore the pros and cons of switching to private screeners, something Sanford International Airport in Orlando, Fla. is already considering

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/25865627/detail.html

[EFerrari]

20. You bet! n/t

[gateley]

3. Have they raised the code level color thing?

I never thought about that, that maybe this is because of intel they've received.

But honestly, the decision to purchase these scanners was made during the Bush administration, so that's probably not it. Maybe.

[Bucky]

13. Before they can search me any further, it'll have to become Threat Level: Brown

or perhaps Threat Level: viscous off-white, depending on who does the pat downs.

[gateley]

42. I honestly don't know what I'd do if I had to fly somewhere. If I did

it would be for a good reason, like seeing somebody I loved. If it's between the search and getting on the plane, wow, I really don't know what I'd do. The principle of the thing gets to me, as it does to us all. I think I'd call Amtrak. :)

[Chulanowa]

4. That's what I thought when they made me take my shoes off.

And made me throw away my toothpaste.

[liberal N proud]

5. Then tell us there is a serious threat

The terrorist already know it, so tell the rest of us. An alert public can better deal with it and possibly even expose any attempts.

Keeping us in the dark is not protecting us!

And the next threat, they will be sticking a probe up your butt.

[Toucano]

51. +100

This is absolutely true.

The secrecy is about protecting business activity, not people.

The Presidential Daily Briefing should be published online daily.

[kctim]

6. Holy crap!

Some commonsense.

[enlightenment]

29. Umm not so much.

They having been planning the roll-out of these new devices and procedures for well over a year. The only reason it seems 'sudden' is because they chose not to announce it and give people an opportunity to make alternate holiday plans. Force enough people through and you'll eventually reach a critical mass who accept it as SOP; then you can argue that no one really cares.

Then they can start planning the next level of intrusive, over-the-top, USELESS invasion of personal space.

[kctim]

33. Oh, Thanks.

I didn't know that people with access to classified intel posted on here.
Thanks for the info.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

41. Did you mean to reply to the OP?

Does she have something to back up her 'belief' that there's "a super credible threat..."

[enlightenment]

45. Google it, tinkerbell.

It was never a state secret.

Now the OP's alleged info - that may be another matter.

[kctim]

49. And since

they didn't broadcast exactly when they were going to implement the new scanners, you believe this is the ONLY reason for if being so sudden? Please.
The fact of the matter is that you could be right in your guess, the OP could be right or it could be a combination of a bunch of things. Without the proper intel, we can only guess and we can only hope that the people that we pay, say like VP Biden who does have clearance, are on top of what is going on and doing what they think should be done.
It doesn't ALWAYS have to be about fears of a police state.

[enlightenment]

50. Uh, no.

IF you had looked it up - which you clearly didn't bother to do - you would have seen that they have been planning on changing the procedures and introducing the scanners for over a year. My point is that the OP sees the implementation of the new procedures and scanners as 'evidence' of 'something' terrible about to happen. Unless that horrible thing has been in the works for a while, which begs another question entirely, there is no connection between body scanners and terror attacks.

These new procedures and machines do not increase security - they do force compliance from the public and convince some, like the OP, that 'something' must be up because otherwise the government would never do it.

You don't have to hate or fear the government to choose to cast a jaundiced eye on what they do; it is common sense to question motives and demand answers when the government starts arbitrarily curtailing civil liberties - and if you don't see it as such, you don't have your eyes open.

That said, I'm not as concerned about a police state (another example of hyperbole that hinders the actual discussion) as I am about the inability of some people to expect honesty and transparency from our government - and to expect our 'homeland security' to come up with ideas that actually increase the security of our 'homeland'.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

39. Exactly...

"Force enough people through and you'll eventually reach a critical mass who accept it as SOP; then you can argue that no one really cares.

Then they can start planning the next level of intrusive, over-the-top, USELESS invasion of personal space."

[HereSince1628]

7. Maybe, but more likely it's a high travel traffic period. The schooling/herding effect

dilutes ALL security measures by volume. This makes the security agencies more anxious than their usual nail-biting civil rights challenging selves.

[fishwax]

8. why don't you think this will be permanent? there's a lot of money in those scanners ...

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

9. We have all been conditioned from cradle to grave to react

and once again have taken the bait.

[Motown_Johnny]

10. Or maybe they figure one successful attack will empower the (R)s

and all the alarmists that support them.


I hate to say it, but the Democratic party is damned if they do and damned if they don't, so they are going to try to keep looking strong on security no matter what the cost.

[Ozymanithrax]

11. I long ago passed the age when I was too young to understand the danger.

Since 9/11, we've had a panti bomber, a shoe bomber, and a shampoo bomber. The successful attacks were the Printer cartridge bombers. I do not carry a Lexmark printer cartridge up my ass.

The current system of annoyance where I have to take off my shoes, my belt, and be checked with a metal detector has worked. If those systems are not longer effective, show me. If not, back off.

Freedom is dangerous.

[xchrom]

14. +1

[quinnox]

12. I'd be surprised if this wasn't permanent

If they change this new policy, I'll be applauding them.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

15. Define "super credible."

[notesdev]

16. Code Brown!!!

Life is dangerous. Effectively arresting everyone who wants to fly a plane is an insane reaction to a remote danger.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

24. Damn you!

[hlthe2b]

I think they thought they could just slide it in...

Passengers weary with holiday travel and who made their travel plans months before would just acquiesce if they did not give them sufficient heads up to mount a protest. How damned naive' that is, absolutely slays me, but I sincerely think that is what they were thinking.

[DrDan]

17. once in place - and once the complaining stops - then it will be here forever

[Individualist]

18. Suggested reading -

They Thought They Were Free by Milton Mayer
It Can't Happen Here by Sinclair Lewis
1984 by George Orwell

[TexasObserver]

19. I really think it's more of the same fear mongering and excess.

[lumberjack_jeff]

21. Blind faith sucks. n/t

[piratefish08]

25. yup.

great band, though........

[Lindsey]

26. I've been really torn about this situation. However, I've come to

the conclusion that post 9/11 EVERYTHING has changed (as we all know). I'm about as liberal as they get but we are no longer safe like we used to be. So, unfortunately, I think the scanners need to happen.:shrug:

[lumberjack_jeff]

40. Remember hijackers? Remember Waco? Remember riots?

We're as safe as we get. What we're NOT safe from is the "security-industrial complex".

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KansDem]

22. We have 17 fucking intel agencies!

Let them do their work. And if they issue a report, don't sit on it like fucking GW Bush did.

We probably have had numerous threats in the last 9 years, but we didn't have these fucking intrusive procedures!

[OmahaBlueDog]

28. Amen!

[leftstreet]

35. +1

[golddigger]

23. It's all about the Almighty dollar. Nothing more, nothing less.

[End Of The Road]

27. If they had a "super credible" threat, then they would know

a little something about possible means and possible targets. And the TSA would focus their efforts accordingly. Osama could be hiding in someone's underwear, perhaps.

There is NO focus to what the TSA is doing. Well, no focus beyond show of force, that is.

The government cries wolf too often, and I don't fall for it anymore. I want to live in a free society -- especially free from the fear engendered by OUR GOVERNMENT.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

30. According to what I've found on the Internet, there have been exactly 25

TWENTY-FIVE terrorist incidents involving airplanes in the entire history of passenger air travel. That's an average of one incident every 3 years.

This has come up for discussion in my local paper, and one of the contributors had an idea that made me LOL: Devise a well-shielded screening chamber that automatically detonates any explosives a person might be wearing. Yeah, yeah, I know it's a sci fi suggestion, but it would actually get only the guilty parties.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

31. If not for the public outcry, YES, it would have been, and still...

may BE permanent! If people don't continue vociferously complaining, cancelling flights and making alternative plans (affecting the airlines bottom $) it will become accepted practice. You think they bought all those expensive machines and don't expect to keep using them? There was a time when the American people knew, and jealously guarded, their rights.

We know there are risks ... everywhere, and everyday, in everything we do! I refuse to be forced to live in a bubble, or be hearded like scared sheep because some corporate lobbying group wanted a market for their ridiculously unnecessary machines.

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. There is a super credible threat all the time

there is security, and then there is security theater!!!!!

[Kennah]

34. Where does this threat fit in ...

... compared with a really, really credible threat, or an honest to God credible threat (I would think that carries more weight with the GOP), or an imminent credible threat, or an ineffable credible threat, or ...

[SaveOurDemocracy]

36. What PROOF do you have of a "super credible threat"?

... or is this just a hunch, a gut-feeling, a dream you had, what you read in the tea leaves...?

You know what I really think? This OP is bogus, based on nothing, blindly supporting more erosion of our rights and government intrusion in our lives.

[Stinky The Clown]

37. Boo!

[Hannah Bell]

38. TSA Readies for Unionization = Republican Assault on TSA & Gov't Employees

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9611252

[LisaL]

43. The only sure way to prevent any terrorist from doing something

on the plane is to stop air transportation all together.
That would really make us safe.

[Iggo]

44. Hit & Run.

Thanks for playing, Maraya.

(EDIT: Of course, I just did the same thing...lol.)

[ChairmanAgnostic]

46. see how easy it is to manipulate thru fear?

[TBF]

47. JFK on terror -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rpG2ZM1vi0

[darkstar3]

52. Oh FFS..."We have always been at war with Eurasia."