The TSA, the Right, and My Busted Watch

[WilliamPitt]

...may not be a popular opinion around here, but this is how I see it...



(Image: Jared Rodriguez / t r u t h o u t; Adapted: Canned Muffins, ralphbod)

The TSA, the Right, and My Busted Watch
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed

Friday 26 November 2010

For the last several days, I have been trying to locate what would appear to be the appropriate and necessary level of angst and fury over the issue of heavy-handed TSA searches at American airports. I say "appropriate and necessary" because, well, all the noise surrounding the matter seems to suggest I have no alternative other than outrage, and if I fail to react that way, I am some sort of dupe, a fool who doesn't understand the Constitutional issues at hand or the dangers represented by what has been described as a glaring governmental over-reach.

Interestingly enough, this opinion is being clarioned from the far reaches of both sides of the left-right spectrum. The electronic left - blogs, online news and commentary sites (like Truthout) and message boards - is up in arms over the violations they see involved in the TSA screening process. On the right, the hue and cry is at an equal, if not higher decibel. For their part, the "mainstream" media is giving as much play as possible to the angry voices being raised against President Obama and the TSA.

I lack the required level of outrage over this because, quite simply, I don't know how to feel about it. Do I like the idea of going through a machine without knowing what the health affects will be? No. Do I understand those who find the idea of having TSA employees looking at translucently revealing images of them to be out of bounds? Certainly. Would I myself like to endure the hard-core groping that is the alternative to going through the screening machine? No. Do I think the penalties threatened against those who refuse to comply to be too severe? Indeed.

But.

Not so long ago, a man did actually attempt to blow up an airplane with a device hidden in his underwear. Just a few short weeks ago, the entire airline industry was thrown into panicked high-alert because of suspicious packages that were either a deliberate attempt to take down planes, or a test of the security measures that defend against such attempts, or both. Recent reports have terrorist elements openly stating their new plan is to shun large, spectacular attacks in favor of smaller actions aimed at disrupting the American economy, and anyone with brain one in their head knows the holiday season is the femoral artery of the American economy. Jab that enough, especially during the heavy-traffic travel season we have entered, and the whole thing will quickly bleed to death right before our eyes.

So.

Do I like the idea of getting blown sideways out of an airliner at 38,000 feet by some brain-damaged zealot with a knot of C-4 nestled beneath his scrotum? As I plummet screaming from the blot of smoke that used to be a 727, will I find serenity in my final moments because I know the guy who killed me didn't have his rights violated by the gendarmes of the TSA? No and no. Do I think there are enough credible dangers out there to justify heightened security measures, especially during the holiday season? I'm leaning towards yes, and if that amounts to political heresy, so be it.

What I do know is that the leading voices of outrage over this issue are the likes of Charles Krauthammer of the Post, Glenn Beck, Mike Huckabee, incoming House Transportation Committee chairman John Mica (R-FL), a bunch of rabid right-wing websites which are also leading the "Obama is not a citizen" birther charge, and a "mainstream" media that continues to push messages that auger inexorably toward the claim that the "Tea Party" is right about everything even remotely related to government.

That is not the kind of company I like to keep, and it gives me great pause about jumping on the TSA-outrage bandwagon. I mean, sure, I have a busted watch at home that's right twice a day, so it's possible these far-right mouthpieces may have stumbled onto some truth for a change. But the fact that the attacks against Obama and the TSA happen to be coming from the same people who have made a cottage industry out of claiming Obama is a secret terrorist who wants to bring Sharia law to America, yet who are now saying he has gone too far in defending the nation from terrorism, even in the face of credible threats to the airline industry, leads me to suspect there is a different game afoot.

Consider the commentary offered on Wednesday by the New York Times on the issue:

The latest controversy to envelop the Obama administration is only partly about the specific rules governing body scanners and pat-downs. It has to do, too, with the federal agency Congress created to deal with airline security and the tension that has been building for years between its latex-gloved employees and the traveling public.

In this way, the "Don't touch my junk" fiasco raises, yet again, what has become the central theme of Mr. Obama's presidency: America's faltering confidence in the ability of government to make things work. From stimulus spending and the health care law to the federal response to oil in the Gulf of Mexico, Mr. Obama has continually stumbled - blindly, it seems - into some version of the same debate, which is about whether we can trust federal bureaucracies to expand their reach without harming citizens or industry.

(Emphasis added)

Perfect. Right from the jump, the article highlights Krauthammer's "Don't touch my junk" article, which was pretty much the genesis of the public hollering over TSA screening procedures. It goes from there to underlining the "mainstream" media's favorite theme from 2010: government is inept. In essence, what we have here is one more instance of the media reinforcing the theme they hammered home over the last year through their cheerful re-branding of the GOP base into the "Tea Party." Government is wrong, government is bad, and from there it is an easy leap to "The Tea Party was right all along."

Bank on this: if the year was 2002, and President Bush declared these TSA measures to be absolutely necessary to the security of the nation, the same right-bent people currently screaming about the heavy-handed Obama TSA policy would be defending those exact same policies to the teeth, with the "mainstream" media right with them all the way down the party line. For the right, this is opposition simply for the sake of opposition itself, and thanks to the media, they have once again managed to shoehorn another "Government sucks" screaming match to the forefront of the national conversation.

Nothing from the "mainstream" media about how the GOP is scuttling the all-important START treaty for no other reason than the fact that a Democrat is in the White House. Nothing from the "mainstream" media about how the GOP is letting unemployment benefits for millions of Americans lapse for no other reason than the fact that there is a Democrat in the White House. Nothing about how 71% of air travelers, like me, do not appear able to work themselves into the seemingly-required media-driven froth over the issue. That's no fun to report on. And it's awfully, awfully convenient that, instead, we have yet another circus inspired by the always-effective loudspeakers of the right.

Awfully convenient, indeed.

Like I said, I have this busted watch that's right twice a day, so it is possible those on the right who are making a massive issue out of this situation, those who find themselves in agreement, and those in the "mainstream" media who have been pushing this story with all their might, have a legitimate point. Those who say these measures are necessary likewise have a point.

One thing is certain: there are tens of millions of Americans who don't give a single damn about the issue of TSA screening, because they are broke and unemployed and getting foreclosed on, which means they can't afford to fly. They have bigger things to worry about. So, I suspect, do we all.

http://www.truth-out.org/the-tsa-right-and-my-busted-watch65422

Note: This was written early Wednesday, but due to the holiday was not published until today. - WRP

[sabrina 1]

1. There are tens of millions of Americans who don't vote either.

This has been an issue for the left since the first appearance of these scanners back in 2004. Is the history of the ACLU's fight against them also inappropriate?

What is inappropriate is the sudden defense of them in aricles like this one from THE LEFT, especially to those of us who have been in the fight from day one when under Bush, the right tried to get them into airports.

Michael Chertoff and Rudy Giuliani must be shocked to see the Left finally defending their hard work trying to profit from the destruction of our Constitutional rights.

Unred'd for helping what some feel may be the astro-turfing of the Left, to try to defend the indefensible, now that a Democrat is doing it. Where were you when the Left was fighting these machines? Were you on the side of Bush/Chertoff, or the ACLU?

[Gormy Cuss]

3. The ACLU was working on this issue long before the recent outrage.

That fact alone is enough to show me that this isn't an issue to abandon just because right wing zealots are trying to transform the issue into one of privatization of airport security.

The right-wing also has a broken watches. This is one of the times that their watches are right on the surface -- these scanners have got to go.

[AuntPatsy]

8. Agree wholeheartedly, regardless of the right once again faking outrage for politcaly

Games it is and has been for some time an outrage many saner heads have been raging about for some time, simply because once again the media is giving the cons their usual air time when It appears it can damage a sitting dem president does not make it acceptable to either ignore or easily accept this outrageous invasion of citizens once again, one would do to not block out the truth that regardless of good ones, when power trs come Into human hands they tend to escalate beyond reason....

[sabrina 1]

21. Yes, exactly. But if the left would stay true to its principles on

these government intrusions into our lives, there would be no privatization, there would simply be no TSA, part of Bush's huge expansion of the police state apparatus that needs to go.

Every terror attack that was stopped under Clinton, and there many, was stopped with good intelligence work and an administration that actually listened to its Intelligence community with 'terror' on the top of its list of priorities and the president focused on it each and every day.

9/11 didn't happen because there were no full body scanners, it happened because Bush ignored over 50 warnings that summer, went on a month-long vacation, and then was never held accountable for his criminal negligence of an issue that was vital to National Security.

These machines were just another attempt to profit from 9/11, fully supported by the fear-mongering fear profiteers such as Giuliani and Chertoff, two officials whose disgraceful failure to protect those they were charged with protecting, was nothing short of criminal itself.

The odds of dying by terror are so miniscule that they do not in any way warrant this giving up of Constitutional rights and I hope the ACLU continues the fight to restore our rights and stop this outrageous appeal to fear. I think it's time for America to stand up and stop cowering like scared rabbits and demand a restoration of our rights.

[The abyss]

24. Excellent! Well said!

"I think it's time for America to stand up and stop cowering like scared rabbits and demand a restoration of our rights."

:applause:

[TorchTheWitch]

31. common sense should be plenty enough

There's no damn way that anyone here believes this crap is necessary, the least bit appropriate or does shit one in keeping anyone safe. This obvious as a herd of elephants in the bathtub about-face is nothing but grotesque partisan bullshit that there is NO EXCUSE for any intelligent person to be stooping to. I can actually forgive a lot of the freeper nuts when they did this SAME shit because they're stupid as a box of rocks, but for people of intelligence here on DU trying to pull this wool over our eyes is despicable especially when for all these years since 9/11 these SAME people were screaming about it every day and pointing and laughing at freepers for the SAME shit they're trying to do now themselves as if no one is going to notice.

It's utterly fucking SHAMEFUL.

[woo me with science]

10. [phone]

Your posts on this issue are consistently excellent.

Thank you for speaking loudly and keeping up the fight.

[woo me with science]

11. Delete wrong place.

[bluestate10]

64. I am on the side of common sense. We DON'T live in a utopian society.

There ARE people that are trying to kill us, regardless of whether we are a harm no one flower child or a hard ass conservative. The government is taking prudent actions. At least the Obama administration tries to tweak systems and policies to make them more sensible. Bush just threw stuff against the wall and refused to admit there were problems with it.

[tavalon]

81. When do you decide prudent has become excessive?

We each have our line in the sand but it's best to know a little a head of time. This is one of my lines in the sand and has been for over a year.

[T Wolf]

2. One explanation of the protest from the right is tht it is another astroturf by corps who

want to take over the very lucrative business of airport security.

It is already a meme being pushed on hate radio.

[lunatica]

4. The big problem is that there are alternative methods

Trained sniffing dogs. One dog will do the job of all the agents at each terminal. This country just can't help doing overkill for every fucking perceived threat. It sends in armies to swat the one mosquito that buzzed it.

Are terrorists out there and in the US, including US Citizens? Yes. Are there alternative methods of dealing with them? Hell yes, and it's happening every single day. Are we not being already surveilled through our phone lines? Does the FBI do its job? Does the CIA know more about us than we feel comfortable with? Yes to all these.

Do you really think the next airline terrorist is going to carry a bomb in his/her shorts? Do you really?

[WilliamPitt]

5. "Do you really?"

I don't know. Neither do you.

[lunatica]

6. I don't know about you but I fully expect terrorist attack

And people are going to be killed during those attacks. I've been hearing about these terrorist attacks for decades, but up to 9/11 they've been happening to other countries. No one is going to stop them better than agencies who aren't having their methods and investigations blasting from every newsroom and newspaper. The covert actions of investigating terrorists will be the only thing that works the best. The use of dogs to sniff out chemicals is a far superior method than agents using their hands to frisk people. What the fuck are they looking for with this method anyway? Bulky underwear? It's guaranteed they'll find plenty of Depends adult diapers then. I'm willing to place bets that all the frisking they do will come up with zero bomb materials. Zero. Unless it's at that precise moment that the terrorist planned to commit suicide.

[Auggie]

20. Body cavities...

As I understand it, most anything hidden in a body cavity can't be detected by pat-downs and screenings. It's just a matter of time until we lose a jet from explosives smuggled in a body cavity.

As for the right-wing spin, are you really surprised Will? How many times have they romanced the turd in a punch bowl?

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

I don't know what the answer is either, though I would expect it would cost a good deal more than anyone would want to pay:

Why the Israeli security model can't work for the U.S. Washington Post / 11-25-10 / by Dana Milbank

An excerpt:

"El Al, Israel's national carrier, reported spending $107,828,000 on security in 2009 for the 1.9 million passengers it carried. That works out to about $56.75 per passenger. The United States, by contrast, spent $5.33 billion on aviation security in fiscal 2010, and the air travel system handled 769.6 million passengers in 2009 (a low year), according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. That amounts to $6.93 per passenger.

The analogy isn't perfect, because security is largely handled by the airline in Israel and by the government here. (In both countries, the government pays just under two-thirds of the security costs.) But this rough comparison indicates that Israel spends more than eight times as much on security per passenger. To duplicate that, the United States would need to spend an extra $38 billion a year."

LINK: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/25/AR2010112502167.html
---------------------------------------------------

I know Tea-Partiers and other repukes are quoted in the article -- so please, no one jump on me. I just wanted to point out what the true cost of security could be.

[WinkyDink]

32. As opposed to the true cost of illegal invasions?

[Auggie]

37. ?

[Mimosa]

48. The continuation of wars is likely to cause more animosity leading to attacks against USA.

And it wasn't the TSA who caught or stopped the underpants bomber.

[Caretha]

50. And I don't know that he won't have one

stuffed up his ass and neither do you. Bend over compliant citizen. :)

[Gormy Cuss]

51. Do you know whether an impaired driver is going to take you out the next time you're on 95?

Do you know if you're going to lose control on black ice and fly off the road?
No. The real issue is what is the risk and what is an appropriate level of prophylaxis.

[JackRiddler]

58. By this logic you should be for anal probes. Also...

checkpoints going in to all cities. Anyone can carry a bomb - a big one - in a car trunk more easily than they can smuggle one on their body into a plane.

[tavalon]

82. That's just it

And even if this is a good faith attempt to handle the last problem (I don't believe it is) what about the next thing and the thing after that? How much liberty is okay to give away in the pursuit of an illusion of safety?

[Boudica the Lyoness]

7. Unrec'd

[TheKentuckian]

9. Life without a moral compass and with an understanding of politics that dictates opposition to

whatever position is held by the other party makes beliefs a calculation rather than principles and ideals.

Increasingly there is not a dime's worth of difference because neither our leaders nor our rank and file have any real beliefs. Folks should stop trying to calibrate and actually stand for something.

[woo me with science]

12. Unrec.

You would be screaming bloody murder if TSA had their hands in your pants under Bush.

[Individualist]

13. No sale! I oppose creeping fascism.

[Aaria]

46. Blatant Facism. Google Haskell truth. This is all for the buck.

"Federal agents also tell ABCNews.com they are attempting to identify a man who passengers said helped Abdulmutallab change planes for Detroit when he landed in Amsterdam from Lagos, Nigeria.

Authorities had initially discounted the passenger accounts, but the agents say there is a growing belief the man have played a role to make sure Abdulmutallab "did not get cold feet."


Didn't hear anything obut this in the news.

[tavalon]

83. And this might have been just creeping along until the right got

their teeth in it. Now it isn't creeping, it's standing with a wide stance and arms at hips. Full on authoritarian.

[notesdev]

14. Where the author errs:

"But.

Not so long ago, a man did actually attempt to blow up an airplane with a device hidden in his underwear. "

Yes, but that man was let on the plane by someone in our government who had the authority to circumvent security protocols. Who was it and why did they do it? Until we have an answer, I don't see how we can assume other than that he was put on the plane specifically to cause a terror incident that the government could then use as an excuse to impose further security measures. The "underwear bomber" would not have been able to get on the plane had normal security measures been followed. After all, he was only on a one-way ticket, originating from a nation of concern, and, oh yeah, on the freaking terror watch list.

Just a few short weeks ago, the entire airline industry was thrown into panicked high-alert because of suspicious packages that were either a deliberate attempt to take down planes, or a test of the security measures that defend against such attempts, or both.

Security applied to travelers does absolutely nothing about this threat. As an argument it is a non sequitor.

Recent reports have terrorist elements openly stating their new plan is to shun large, spectacular attacks in favor of smaller actions aimed at disrupting the American economy, and anyone with brain one in their head knows the holiday season is the femoral artery of the American economy. Jab that enough, especially during the heavy-traffic travel season we have entered, and the whole thing will quickly bleed to death right before our eyes.

I'd qualify the harassment received by travelers as "smaller actions... disrupting the American economy". I will be generous and not impute intent. But in this case the cure is worse than the disease, no? More people are not flying due to fear of the TSA than due to fear of terrorism.



If one is going to be a professional author, do the research before releasing an article!!!

[LibDemAlways]

15. I frankly don't care who else is against these invasions of our

collective privacy and the government's shredding of the 4th Amendment. I agree that the right is being hypocritical and opportunistic, but I've been against heavy-handed TSA tactics from the get-go and posted about it here on DU many times dating back to 2003.

I don't see this as a left/right issue. It's a civil liberties issue. Does the government have a right to engage in the wholesale groping of the genitals of the flying public or perform virtual strip-searches using potentially dangerous machines operated by unqualified personnel? The so-called underwear bomber's father alerted authorities in Nigeria, who, in turn, alerted the CIA. Yet, nothing was done and almost a year later the public suddenly has to undergo this type of humiliation? There's something very suspicious going on, and it has nothing to do with keeping the public safe. As someone pointed out on DU the other day, if they wanted to keep us safe they'd provide health care. This is about an encroaching police state and the dismantling of the few freedoms we have left.

[SidDithers]

16. K&R...nt

Sid

[BREMPRO]

17. what surprises me most is

that you still wear a watch?

great article and totally with you on the issue- RW using it as just an expedient and thoughtless opportunity to score points against "government" and Obama. If this was a Bush edict the RW echo chamber would be cheering and supporting the extra "security" measures without hesitation. There clearly IS a threat as you've outlined that is well documented, so all the chiming on DU about these new security measures turning us into obedient government controlled cattle is overreach. On the other side, I've seen RW talking heads turned around sidewards trying to reconcile their concerns and exaggerated claims about "naked" pictures and invasive TSA "government" agents groping your children, with their previous unwaivering support for vigorous security measures and the security industrial complex. Once again, as with the contradiction between wanting to give 700 billion of borrowed money in the form of tax cuts to the wealthy, while expressing urgent concern about the ballooning deficit, their contradictions are irreconcilable. They never cease to amaze me.

SO, We should have more info about these machines-what kind of radiation are we being exposed too (i've read that it's the equivalent of 15 minutes of flying in an airplane). If you don't want to be put through the machine for health or privacy concerns (the outlines created seem so innocuous that I don't know why anyone would be concerned). The other option of a pat down seems reasonable, as long as it's not abused. I feel sorry for the TSA agents who are put in the cross-hairs of the controversy just trying to do their job and keep us save. Instead they are portrayed in the media and blogs as perverts and pedophiles. Right. So why not restate publicly the reasons for the added security? For all the complaints you could say about Bush, he would have had a press conference and/ or surrogates chattering all over the media supporting the added security measures, even if it was misinformation, you would have something to react to. Instead of public relations to introduce these new measures we get "don't touch my junk" and SNL skits to inform us and leave us flailing with not enough information and jokes from a PR failure. What is wrong with a press conference? Some kind of more public heads up about these measures being enacted?

I'm an Obama supporter, but One BIG complaint I have about him is that he has not held enough press conferences or used surrogates to good effect. WTF. A great communicator who could turn a room of reporters on a dime hiding in the oval office? WHY? DOn't give another political speech or weekly update, COMMUNICATE- give us a press conference! There is much to be said about the weight and ritual of facing the press and responding to concerns. This whole controversy might have been addressed and the RW de-fanged, LW placated with a little public Q&A.

Other issues- The RW wants (like just about everything government does now) to privatize TSA (despite the fact that this was the situation when 911 happened) It just stinks that they can use ginned up public outrage to push for more inefficient and expensive privatizing of public functions. This, along with the blatant Obama/govt bashing, like you, makes me so sick I find it hard to respond reasonably to any of their complaints, even if they may be justified.

Great thoughtful post- thanks Will

[krabigirl]

18. Unrec for partisan bs.

[madrchsod]

19. i agree, the real stories are not reported.

even though the truth is finally reveled it is to late. it`s the grand distraction the right uses to further their dismantling of our society.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

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

[spanone]

22. recommended

i actually flew over the holiday and it was normal as hell

[TorchTheWitch]

25. because the TSA turned off the scanners and only did a fraction of gropes

that they had been doing and the old method of not touching the genitals. THAT's why it was normal as hell, and they're trying to pretend none of this occurred just like they tried to pretend that they had no way to store the nudie-scan images. It's as clear as the nose on anyone's face that this one single action alone on the busiest travel day of the year that these scans and gropes don't do SHIT to keep anyone safe and they KNOW it.

We're supposed to believe that our busiest travel day of the year is Terrorist Free Day and that the TSA must have been kindly notified by the terrorists that they were taking this one day off in order to help us convince ourselves that going through airport security with the scan and grope policy is just dandy after all while conveniently not noticing that they DROPPED the new scan and grope policy for the day. Just how the FUCK does anyone try and justify these machines and genital groping as sooooooooooo necessary to keep us safe when the TSA just turns the machines off and stops groping most of the people they had been or in the same invasive way for no other reasons than convenience in getting people to their flights on time and trying to make it appear that this invasive new policy is just great while conveniently forgetting to mention that they WEREN'T USING IT?

[ProudDad]

26. The "shoestring bomber" and the "underwear bomber" came from "over there"

and would not today be subjected to these "enhanced" procedures anyway...

(And how tone deaf is if of the Obama Admin. and TSA to call it "enhanced pat-downs" -- echoing the infamous "enhanced interrogation" procedures of the last war criminal...)

[rug]

27. Boo!

[tavalon]

84. Best one line retort ever!

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

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

[pauldp]

38. +1

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

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

[Mimosa]

49. BlueNorthwest, I hear crickets. LOL n/t

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

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

[ProudDad]

30. FYI -- the (fascist) beat goes on...

In Repeat of Milgram’s Electric Shock Experiment, People Still Pull the Lever

"In the new study, to be published in American Psychologist, Burger replicated the gist of the original experiment but included measures to minimize the psychological stress on the test subjects, such as limiting the shocks to 150 volts and not letting them administer any further shocks even if they indicated their willingness. The new participants were reminded repeatedly that they could stop at any time, while in Milgram’s version, participants were told, “The experiment requires that you go on,” if they expressed hesitation. Again, however, the vast majority of the 29 men and 41 women taking part were willing to push the button knowing it would cause pain to another human. Even when another actor entered the room and questioned what was happening, most were still prepared to continue . About 70 percent continued the shocks up to 150 volts and were willing to go even higher. “That was surprising and disappointing,” Burger said ."

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/12/19/in-repeat-of-milgrams-electric-shock-experiment-people-still-pull-the-lever/


I think that it's not just about "authoritarian" following. I think that since the Dominator "culture" that bombards us from the moment we leave the womb indicates that it's MUCH better to be among the "powerful" than among the "powerless" that people once put into a position of power in a relationship will do almost anything to avoid switching roles!

Think about it...

[Warren Stupidity]

33. I'll take my chances with underwear bombers on no fly lists without passports

No passport.
On UK Home Office 'watch-list'.
Father tried to warn US about son's activities.
US INTELLIGENCE FULLY AWARE OF Abdulmutallab's TERORIST LINKS:

"U.S. State Department officials said in Congressional testimony that the State Department had wanted to revoke Abdulmutallab's visa, but U.S. intelligence officials requested that his visa not be revoked. The intelligence officials' stated reason was that revoking Abdulmutallab's visa could have foiled a larger investigation into al-Qaida."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umar_Farouk_Abdulmutallab

So, as a result of the famous underwear bomber, the recommended preventative measures are to strip search all passengers. SERIOUSLY? YOU SUPPORT THAT?

By the way, the 'printer cartridge plot' has to do with airplane cargo security. Tossing that in there, presumably to increase the 'be afraid' factor, is more than a bit disingenuous.

Heartily unrec'd.

[avaistheone1]

34. Wow. Very surprised and equally disappointed.

I can't write much now as I have some work to take care of.

Will I like most of your writing, but you really haven't thought out these issues very well imo.

Gotta unrecommend this piece.

Later.

:(

[CreekDog]

35. do you support multiple, forced x-rays or not?

yes, multiple, forced x-rays each way, per trip.

wondering how you feel about that?

[somone]

36. Blind loyalty above principles leads to rank hypocrisy

This shit is an assault on basic American values, and even the teabag cockroaches know it.

[Catherina]

42. +1 n/t

[TorchTheWitch]

44. +100000000000000000000

[woo me with science]

55. +10000000000000000000 nt

[Moostache]

39. Unrec for too much fail

I cannot support the actions of the TSA because the right sees an opportunity to make noise.
I cannot support the TSA in general because it is an offshoot of everything I find offensive in the world.
I cannot support the sentiment that trading liberty for security is a good thing.

I cannot support this for all the same reasons I cannot support warrant-less wiretapping or water boarding or special renditions.

Your sentiments were read and I find them 100% wanting sir, good day.

[Subdivisions]

41. +1000 n/t

[truedelphi]

47. yep, the furor over al this is that the Whole Notion Of Being An American

Has to do with our liberties, among them those enumerated inside the Fourth Amendment: To whit we have the right to be secure inside our bodies and homes, Unless sufficient probable cause exists, and even then there is that pesky thing of the "Warrant"

If smeone in the government feels I am not fit to board an airplane, well, then with all the Billions Homeland Security has at their disposal, let them get themselves a damn warrant.

[woo me with science]

56. [phone] nt

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

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

[Dawson Leery]

52. There goes for being the voice of progressives.

:eyes:

Had Bush done this, you would have been after him for it! This policy is wrong regardless of which politician is behind it.

Hounds would be the most effective and efficient means of finding potential explosive materials (if they exist).

[greytdemocrat]

53. Will...

You forgot to put Bu$h or KKKRove in the story. Shameful.

[Odin2005]

54. Unrec for blind partisan loyalty over principles and liberty

:puke:

This OP is a good example of how American politics have become completely corrupted into the politics of personality and personal loyalty to The Leader. I see no future for us except for crude Caesarism.

[woo me with science]

57. +1000 nt

[jefferson_dem]

68. Shorter you: I disagree with t he OP. Therefore...

the OP is a corrupt stooge. Oy.

[steve2470]

59. The only 100% effective way to prevent airplane bombings is...

1- to strip search all passengers, pilots and crew members, without exception
2- to search their clothes and belongings thoroughly, without exception
3- to do body cavity searches on all passengers, pilots and crew members, without exception
4- to search all cargo, luggage and carry-on luggage thoroughly, without exception
5- To inspect each plane before takeoff thoroughly, to make sure there are no hidden bombs

Are we willing, as a nation, to undergo these drastic measures that would be perfectly routine in Nazi Germany ?

I think the answer is NO. They are extreme and in violation of our civil rights.

Therefore, there will always be a chance, however remote, that your plane will be blown up.

All we can do is implement reasonable security measures and remove ourself from harmful foreign interventions that provoke the terrorists into trying to bomb our aircraft.

[Warren Stupidity]

75. the risk of death from mechanical failure/pilot error far greater

than death by plane bomber. This whole thing is New Security State bullshit, and as usual people buy into because KITTENS WILL DIE.

[LisaL]

87. And even all of that isn't going to prevent a plane from goind down

due to mechanical failure or pilot error.
Since 9/11 we had planes go down and it had nothing to do with terrorism.

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

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

[whatchamacallit]

61. Wish the TSA could protect me from pointless crap like this. (nt)

[johnaries]

62. I'm with you, Will. This faux outrage is all just a distraction.

There, I said it. There are much more important things we should be focusing our attention on. This is basically a non-issue, a tempest in a teapot.

I'm flying to Miami on business Monday, and if selected I will have no problem going through the scanners.

[woo me with science]

65. Oh, I assure you

the outrage is real.

[jefferson_dem]

67. Yeah.

Right.

[Union Scribe]

71. Just a few whiny cancer survivors is all, right?

I'm sure you're right and the rest of the populace is fine being publicly groped and humiliated.

[woo me with science]

74. Too bad your fear is so real

and blinding.

[guruoo]

79. So, why do you hate America?

One does not dare speak out against the thundering herd,
once it is in full stampede.

Hang in there, kiddo.
:hi:

[bluestate10]

63. The thing that surprises me.

Is the almost insane amount of verbiage the scanner issue has gotten on DU. But, with me being a moderate, I am not surprised that far left people would act as bizarrely as right wingers.

[jefferson_dem]

66. Big Rec and thumbs up...

You. Are. Right.

Thanks for writing and posting.

[freedom fighter jh]

69. Maybe I would have a tiny bit of faith that the government is doing the right thing if . . .

. . . if our national understanding of terrorism made any sense in the first place.

But it doesn't.

The 911 story is full of holes. Those who don't believe it have no voice in the mainstream conversation.

Wasn't it the underpants bomber that was supposed to have precipitated this security bump? The guy was on a terrorist watch list and was allowed to board the plane without a passport.

Trying to fix the terrorism problem the way our government is doing it makes me think of those horror stories you hear about someone going to the OR to get a leg amputated and the doctor cuts off the wrong leg. Or a doctor making a sloppy diagnosis and giving the wrong treatment and then the patient dies from the treatment. You can't fix a problem without a pretty good idea of what caused it. If the problem is severe enough, your misguided efforts to fix it may be pretty extreme and can do a lot of damage.

Once we find out the truth behind the terrorism we'll have a better idea how to fix it.

Meanwhile, our rights are violated.

[RandomThoughts]

70. Look at the effects.

They smear the left, while getting security state measures in place.

In Arizona they smeared the right while trying to get papers law in.


They want a security state, they push for it regardless of anything else. As they drive people into poverty, they have to find a way to remove their freedoms to protect themselves.

Not hard to figure out.

And it is not protection from a terrorist blowing up a plane, but protection from a population that thinks they have rights.

[mgc1961]

72. Hi, Will.

:hi:

[Oilwellian]

73. Will

You're not the same person I met many years ago. I'm sorry I read this.

[guruoo]

76. K&R, party pooper...

"One thing is certain: there are tens of millions of Americans who don't give a single damn
about the issue of TSA screening, because they are broke and unemployed and getting foreclosed on,
which means they can't afford to fly. They have bigger things to worry about. So, I suspect, do we all."

[JTFrog]

77. K&R

[demodonkey]

78. Will! You were Andy Stephenson's friend, and you KNOW how hard he worked to expose the lousy...

...poorly-tested paperless voting machines, as a lot of the rest of us did (and many of us are still doing!)

These scanners are no different. Paperless voting machine scenario played out again. A high-tech 'cure' that is in reality poorly-tested (mostly tested by the vendors), no independent testing; big money thrown at it by 'well-meaning' government effort to solve what seems to be an immediate problem without being sure that this purchase will even effectively solve the problem... and without any think-through of the long-term problems this 'cure' may cause.

Personally, I don't want to go through one of these scanners because I don't want to find out 5 or 10 years later that the software failed and I got a melanoma-causing dose of x-rays (especially with no health insurance!)

I am a progressive Democrat, and I say,

Scan paper ballots, not human bodies!

[tavalon]

80. Slippery slope Will

Yes, it's strange to be on the same page with a bunch of people who remind me of KKK (teabaggers) and yet, there it is. I threatened to do a nude protest outside Seatac a year ago when the backscatters were first discussed for our airport. I'm not new to this fight. My husband begs me not to point and laugh when we go through TSA with the shoe rule and the breastmilk rule and the three oz. rule and the fingernail clipper rule and the................ I do my best to humor him but it's hard because it's absurd and always has been.

Look Will, eventually, possibly, horribly, someone is going to get a dirty nuke into a city. If a failed panty bomber can supposedly cause this much need for expensive and poorly tested and pornographic machines, what will the eventual next tragedy invoke? And, if this was such a danger (and it potentially was) why didn't these get rolled out until a year later? And why is it being said that the backscatter rapiscans might not have caught this man? Follow the money and the increasing talk of rebellion and continental Congresses being called. It's time to simultaneously rile up and calm the masses.

As long as there are fundamentalists who hate _________________, (usually, America goes in that line, but it could be anyone), there will be terrorism. We need to realize the sad fact that we have made enemies and that it will take generations to turn it around, especially since we just spent the last 10 years making more enemies, so we haven't even started on the generational work nor do we show any desire to.

This is security theater, not real security and I would like to think we can be adult enough to recognize that life has risks and that feeling safer isn't the same as being safer. And even if it were, I think we all know Ben Franklin's thoughts on that and I couldn't agree more.

There are concrete, far less profitable and less demeaning ways to make us somewhat safer, never fully safe, but safer. Those things aren't being done and even if they were, someone, somewhere will find a loophole that we never thought of. Our government wants us scared and obedient. Why?

I understand that you can't find your rage around this but I can and I have. This dog and pony show has gone far enough and the added show of force against the American people has gone far enough. They don't give a damn about your safety. They may care about your illusion of safety (I doubt it) but they definitely see a fine double edged opportunity to fleece and cow you at the same time. I can't stop them from buying the machines but I will not be cowed.

I will wholeheartedly agree that I'm looking around at my strange bedfellows and I suspect this is just a political game to them, but to me, it's a line in the sand and if their strident voices will help push this back, then so be it.


PS it's really weird to be diametrically opposed to your point of view here. We're usually on similar pages and you are my greatest mentor when it comes to politics. I wouldn't be here without that teach in in Austin so many years ago.

[tavalon]

85. Hey, Will, normally I don't care about whether I get a reply

but I think I, and others have made some pretty valid points here. I'd like it if you would make this one a dialogue. I'm not real convinced by your argument and you're probably not by mine, but I'd like it if we could parry it about a bit?

[Turbineguy]

86. It's a Chertoff Operation.

And that means two things:

1). It won't work.
2). It will be expensive.

[upi402]

88. I feel the same

I'm so torn over this. I'm not able to piss money away on plane tickets to white sand beaches anymore, so it's not an issue like that for me.
It's a 'rights' issue and I have questions:

1) Are we screening cargo this well?
2) Are we using sniffing dogs all we can?
3) Are we using highly trained (and well paid) interviewers to screen zealots?
4) Could we use infra red heat sensors to detect nervous stress, etc.?

So many who support this TSA seem like Stepford Wives who angrily rise to defend it with little info to support their position. For me, I need info.