TSA, or T&A

[Yeggo]

Am I the only one that's not virulently on one side of this or the other? I'm still in the "trying to figure out why we're talking about this" stage.

But here's where I am, so tell me why I'm right or wrong: I'm not a huge fan of the pat-downs, but I'm also not going to be a huge fan of what happens when we miss someone with plastic explosives in his crotch. I still think everyone should get full-body scans and be done with it. Besides shouldn't the conservative, free market argument be "if you don't like it, don't fly?" When did they become so concerned with stuff like this?

http://conversation101.squarespace.com/airport-screening/2010/11/27/tsa-or-ta.html

[hlthe2b]

1. My question for those who are ok with crotch gropes....

Since admittedly, body cavity searches are the ONLY way to actually answer the question as to whether someone has a concealed explosive (other than infinitely more well-trained bomb-sniffing dogs, which won't make corporations any money), are you ok with the advancement of the next step? Will you likewise not question use of body cavity searches or forcing menstruating women to remove their tampons for inspection? Exactly how far are you willing to go?

[saigon68]

6. forcing menstruating women to remove their tampons

[hlthe2b]

9. ahh, misogyny is not at all dead on DU

[somone]

2. Not T&A, but T&A&S

How about plastic explosives in his STOMACH? I'm sooooo scared.

Okay, abdominal & pelvic CT scan for everyone! Endoscopy & colonoscopy for secondary screening.

[pintobean]

3. What's so special about flying?

We're at risk everywhere there's a crowd. Do we need a scanner on everyone's front door? When we give up our rights, we lose. The bad guys are winning. I don't understand how people fail to see that.

[treestar]

8. The numbers

Jets can kill people on the ground, too. And usually have many people in them.

That is why the require a co-pilot. If something happens to a small plane pilot it would not cause as much damage as a crashing jet. So one pilot can go in them.

I'd hate to think what would happen if we had just one subway station or bus bomber. Or a theater. That happened in Russia and they dealt with it and moved on. This is the USA, where it wouldn't be an hour before some talking head would wonder what the government could have done to stop it.

[hlthe2b]

12. So we crowd people in TSA lines so that any perpetrator ....

can simply detonate on the ground, taking out thousands. No need to even get on the plane. Yet, NO ONE (except KO on one occasion) has dared to even point out this obvious fallacy.

[treestar]

59. In any public area, some people can at least run

On board an aircraft that has taken off, not so.

That does make some difference.

I would look up those bombs in Israel where suicide bombers attacked buses or open public places. Probably would not involve as many people.

[Eric J in MN]

4. How many people boarded a plane from a US airport with explosives

...under their clothes before this scan/grope policy?

Zero.

[pintobean]

5. And how many have they caught since?

Zero. I don't believe they ever will.

[LisaL]

18. But TSA found some pot and alcohol.

I saw it on the news. Imagine that.

[LisaL]

17. Zero.

[jefferson_dem]

7. You're not the only one.

The level of unhinged hysteria surrounding this (non) issue is really astounding.

I just traveled from ATL to New York's LaGuardia and back again. It was totally uneventful as far as TSA action goes -- no scandalous gropings...no "protests"...no nothing...other than hard working security officers doing the best they can to make sure we are able to safely land at our points of desination.

In my opinion, GropeGate is just the latest unfounded shiny object fixation, promoted primarily by the right wing echo chamber, who are already motivated to stir up faux anxiety and fear, and their willing accomplices in pockets of the mainstream (and liberal) press.

[coalition_unwilling]

10. The ACLU (of which, in full disclosure, I'm a member) has opposed the

TSA policies and practices for the last six years. Are you saying the ACLU has a fixation with 'shiny objects'? Is the ACLU part of the 'right wing echo chamber'?

Edited for typo.

[jefferson_dem]

13. No. I'm not saying that.

The ACLU (of which, I'm also a member - have been since I've been of age to vote) has a fixation with doing their job - taking at typically absolutist position on what they see as potential violations of privacy rights. I get that.

[woo me with science]

14. It's times like this that I really, really wish

I had an alternate reality machine to show EXACTLY what these boards would look like if these VERY SAME MEASURES had been implemented under Bush.

All the apologists would be screaming bloody murder if Bushco had their hands in your pants.

Deny it? That is LAUGHABLE.

Hypocrisy is the order of the day.

[notesdev]

11. I've got an idea

I really want to ensure your safety, so before you leave the house every day I will grope you all over, same with your spouse and kids.

After all it's just as likely that I'll catch you with plastic explosives in your underwear as it is that the TSA will catch anyone.

Bend over! It's for your own good!

[veganlush]

15. maybe they should have two planes for each flight

one for the people who don't want to be checked for explosives or weapons. They can all fly on the same plane (if they can find a flight crew willing to go). And everybody else can use the other plane. Problem solved.

[LisaL]

16. Maybe the people who are scared of terrorists should stay home.

If you are so scared of terrorists stay home and let the rest of us be on our way. Problem solved.

[veganlush]

20. if you're so scared of a stranger touching you,

or of radiation equal to two extra minutes aboard a plane, you should stay home.

[LisaL]

22. TSA has never found someone trying to bring explosives

on a domestic flight. If you are so scared of something that has never happened you should stay home.

[veganlush]

25. is it possible that the screenings

have had a deterrent effect upon those who have contemplated such an attempt?

[LisaL]

27. Before TSA implemented their enhanced pat downs and

got their x-ray scanners, TSA stopped zero people from trying to get onto domestic flight with explosives.

[jberryhill]

37. They have stopped explosives

See the table of statistics posted below.

She just makes stuff up.

[LisaL]

39. Whom did they stop?

There was a shoe bomber and an underwear bomber, neither of whom was trying to get onto the plane in US, and neither of whom was stopped from getting on the plane. By the way,
"There has never been an explosive found on a flight from one U.S. city to another, Pistole acknowledged. But, he pointed out, domestic terrorists exist -- Timothy McVeigh, Eric Rudolph and Ted Kaczynski, for instance -- and there are people who want to do the government harm. While America is "fortunate" that such an incident has not occurred on a domestic flight, he said, it could conceivably happen."
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-11-22/travel/travel.tsa.pat.downs_1_pat-downs-privacy-concerns-agent/2?_s=PM:TRAVEL

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

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

[LisaL]

42. And I don't care for your confusing table that stops in 2001,

considering John Pistole admits:
"There has never been an explosive found on a flight from one U.S. city to another, Pistole acknowledged. But, he pointed out, domestic terrorists exist -- Timothy McVeigh, Eric Rudolph and Ted Kaczynski, for instance -- and there are people who want to do the government harm. While America is "fortunate" that such an incident has not occurred on a domestic flight, he said, it could conceivably happen."
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-11-22/travel/travel.tsa.pat.downs_1_pat-downs-privacy-concerns-agent/2?_s=PM:TRAVEL

[jberryhill]

45. WTF? The table ends in 2008

Yes, numbers are confusing.

Your statement that TSA has not stopped explosives from getting onto planes is false, and the quote above about things "found on a flight" is not germane to your provably factually false statement


http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_02_16b.html

Table 2-16b: Prohibited Items Intercepted at Airport Screening Checkpoints

[LisaL]

47. Where are the explosives in that table?

[jberryhill]

48. Here you go

http://www.securityinfowatch.com/The+Latest/tsa-stops-man-oklahoma-airport-who-possessed-explosive-device

TSA Stops Man at Oklahoma Airport who Possessed Explosive Device


I realize "incendiaries" is a long word for you, since you find tables of numbers to be "confusing".

It takes all of a few seconds to demonstrate that your assertion about the TSA not stopping a variety of weapons from getting aboard aircraft is factually false.

[LisaL]

49. So what happened to this guy? Was he convicted of anything?

The only information I can find that he was let out on 10,000 $ bail.

[jberryhill]

50. Are you, like, proud of your inability to find stuff out?

There are facts on the internets... from like "primary sources".

He was found guilty and sentenced.


02/21/2006 15 ORDER ALLOWING DEFENDANT, CHARLES A. DREYLING, JR. TO FILE PSYCHOLOGICAL AND PSYCHIATRIC REPORTS UNDER SEAL granting 13 Motion to Seal Document as to Charles A Dreyling Jr (1). Signed by Judge Doyle W. Argo on 2/21/06. (sr, ) (Entered: 02/21/2006)

02/21/2006 16 Psychiatric / Medical Report Received (Sealed) as to Charles A Dreyling, Jr (sr, ) (Entered: 02/21/2006)

02/23/2006 17 MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Judge Doyle W. Argo :Sentencing held on 2/23/2006 for Charles A Dreyling, Jr (1), Count(s) 1, Dft sentenced to 2 years probation, 104 hours of community service and $1000.00 fine.. (sr, ) (Entered: 03/07/2006)

03/07/2006 18 JUDGMENT & Commitment as to Charles A Dreyling, Jr (1), Count(s) 1, Dft sentenced to 2 years probation, 104 hours of community service and $1000.00 fine. . Signed by Judge Doyle W. Argo on 3/7/06. (sr, ) (Entered: 03/07/2006)

04/04/2006 TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings as to Charles A Dreyling, Jr held on February 23, 2006 before Judge Argo. Court Reporter: B. Jeanne Ring. Transcript of: Sentencing Hearing (dl, ) (Entered: 04/04/2006)

03/05/2008 19 REPORT On Offender Under Supervision and Order as to Charles A Dreyling, Jr, ORDER as to Charles A Dreyling, Jr re 17 Sentencing, 18 Judgment & Commitment. Signed by Magistrate Judge Doyle W. Argo on 2/28/08. (sr, ) (Entered: 03/18/2008)

[LisaL]

51. 2 years probation, community service and a fine?

[jberryhill]

53. Was the explosive device detected and kept off of a plane?

Yes, it was.

The argument "explosives have not gotten on planes, therefore TSA procedures are ineffective" is not a logically sound position from which to argue in the first place.

Is your statement to the effect of "it never happened" false? Yes.

[LisaL]

54. Clearly nobody believes that guy was trying to blow up the plane,

or he wouldn't have gotten two years probation.

[hlthe2b]

58. +1000

[jberryhill]

35. That is simply not true - they HAVE stopped explosives

Look, disagreement is fine, but you can't just make stuff up

Table 2-16: Airlinea Passenger Screening Results by Type of Weapons Detected, Persons Arrested, and Bomb Threats Received

http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/2003/html/table_02_16.html

[LisaL]

40. Whom should I believe? You or John Pistole?

"There has never been an explosive found on a flight from one U.S. city to another, Pistole acknowledged. But, he pointed out, domestic terrorists exist -- Timothy McVeigh, Eric Rudolph and Ted Kaczynski, for instance -- and there are people who want to do the government harm. While America is "fortunate" that such an incident has not occurred on a domestic flight, he said, it could conceivably happen."
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-11-22/travel/travel.tsa.pat.downs_1_pat-downs-privacy-concerns-agent/2?_s=PM:TRAVEL

[jberryhill]

43. "on a flight" - now you are simply being deceptive

You wanted to know about items stopped or found by the TSA. I posted you a link to tables which give those kinds of numbers.

Then you post about things being found "on a flight".

Playing rhetorical tricks is more important to you than actually getting at the facts.

Fact - TSA has prevented many firearms, knives, and explosive devices from getting on planes.

[LisaL]

44. Fire arms and knives can be found by metal detectors.

[jberryhill]

46. No, not ceramic knives

"firearms, knives, and explosive devices" - gee did you ignore something there?

This is just a word game to you.

[LisaL]

52. O'key, I will admit that I misunderstood Pistole quote.

Would you agree that there have been no attempts to bring down a flight originating in the US with explosives?

[jberryhill]

55. No I would not agree with that proposition

Again, it is a form of "I haven't heard about it, so it didn't happen". I am not your research service, nor am I a personal databank of all criminal activity. Quite obviously, a number of weapons and incendiary devices are seized by the TSA. This indicates that quite a number of people attempt to take these things aboard airplanes.

However, you should be careful asserting absolute negatives as fact, because quite often they are simply professions of personal ignorance.

I am not chasing goalposts today.

[LisaL]

56. Why would TSA hide an attempt to blow up the plane that

they have stopped?
Especially considering the public relationship situation they find themselves in?

[veganlush]

23. that's no different from what i said.

..except instead of the safety conscious staying home, they just fly in another plane.

[LisaL]

24. You know perfectly well no one will be providing two planes.

[veganlush]

19. The bottom line with this issue is:

There is most likely going to be another bombing attempt by some religious flake, similar to the underwear bomber. If successful, everyone will be clamoring to know how he got through to do it. The current controversy over the TSA screenings will echo in the collective memory and provide some push-back against the inevitable right-wing smear campaign whose main meme will be that the administration didn't do enough and is weak on terror. I'm not saying this somewhat weak inoculation is the reason for the screenings, but I think that everyone knows that another attempt is almost inevitable and every effort to thwart must be made.

[LisaL]

21. TSA always appears to try and stop the attempt

which already had happened-after the shoe bomber we have to take shoes off and after underwear bomber TSA is very interested what's in our underwear. So I am curious as to what makes you think that all this security theater is going to prevent another attempt?

[veganlush]

26. I think at the very least it provides deterent.

...I think it's likely that some who have contemplated an "underwear bomber" type of scenario for themselves have reconsidered due to the possibility of getting caught with the explosives and spending the rest of their days in jail having accomplished nothing.

Secondly, I think that it's possible that some will try, and will get caught.

Thirdly, what would you estimate is the break-down on this issue, in other words, what percentage of the flying public do you believe is for the scanners, etc, and what percentage against? I ask this because if this "theater" provides some level of confidence in the flying public who might otherwise stay home, isn't that a victory of sorts, keeping everybody flying, compared to half the people staying home, afraid to fly?

Forth: The facts have been distorted in this issue. There are many ways to lie, and most of those ways have been trotted out in this controversy. One way is exaggeration. There have many tall tales associated with this controversy that have been fueling the hysteria.

[LisaL]

28. Why would it be necessary for a terrorist to get on the plane

in order to blow something up?

[veganlush]

29. It's NOT necessary, but it is one way to do it.

what's your point?

[LisaL]

30. So, I presume you are just fine with these pat down stations

and x-ray scanners being on every corner?

[veganlush]

31. Knockng a plane out of the sky

requires a relatively small, concealable amount of explosives with the potential of killing hundreds of people. To kill hundreds of people in an outside setting would usually require a bigger explosion like the OK bomber used. That attack killed 168 people and required something like six 55 gallon drums of explosive material concealed in a truck, not a crotch. Terrorists literally get more bang for their buck by getting a plane.

I don't think the scanners and pat-downs are great things. I think they suck. I don't have a better solution though either.

[highprincipleswork]

33. Are you willing?

Are you really so willing to give up your Constitutional rights, in a slow drip, where these things will also be implemented in many other public spaces (already happening) because you are SCARED!!

I say, "Give me liberty, or give me death."

Knock my damn plane out of the sky, if that's what has got to happen. Let U.S. fighter jets shoot me down, if I'm going to head into a public building. Heck, you could get run over while crossing the street too. So, let's ban cars while we're at it.

Really. The hysteria has got to stop, or we will never be a productive, sane, sound-thinking, principle-holding nation again.

Look at it this way. With this level of terror, in the human hearts of U.S. citizens, to where they give up their Constitutional rights and spend insane amounts of money on foreign wars, you could say that the terrorists have already won.

We cannot, and will never be able to, stop every last risk of getting on a plane. But we can stand up for our rights, our freedoms, our way of life, and our principles.

[veganlush]

34. The big picture

I'm not scared for myself, I'm scared for a country that will be thrown back into the waiting arms of the neo-cons if a terror attack occurs on "our" watch. Obama is taking a multi-pronged approach to the problem, including reaching out to Muslim communities and trying to win the hearts and minds. I don't want to go back to rabid neo-cons days where we attack countries that have nothing to do with it, etc..I think that Obama has to avoid having an attack on his watch in order for his agenda and approach to have an opportunity to work. Just as he had to spend money to get out of the financial hole his predecessor left for him, I think he has to prevent an attack by using all different methods to keep his job and ultimately change directions slowly.

[highprincipleswork]

36. Public Relations

Can we all just realize that George W. Bush had the greatest attack on U.S. soil and still managed to leave office as if he wasn't responsible at all. How did he do that? Messaging. Control of the media. Control of the message. I would rather that President Obama and Democrats of all stripes got ahold of the message, than that they imitate Republicans and give away everything precious of our republic, just as the Republicans do, but just more slowly.

No, standing for something is not a bargaining chip, to be given away. If Democrats would only realize that if and when they stand on principle they are stronger than all these little giveaways, we would be in much better shape, as a country and as a party.

No, I am not interested in giving away my civil liberties for any purpose or fashion or any future pie in the sky either.

[veganlush]

38. I agree

about the messaging thing, as I have posted many times. I'm really frustrated that so many people don't know, for example, that Obama and the dems gave this country's taxpayers the biggest tax CUT in American history. This is a catastrophic failure of messaging and it's only one of many omissions they are guilty of. But does anybody doubt that the repugnants will win it all in 2012 if a terror attack occurs? Many ignorant Americans still think Bush acted heroically while the minority of us realize the truth, that he dropped the ball big time, then fumbled it, then picked it up and threw it away, then melted down the economy. I think Obama could hang on by a thread, especially if the economy improves, and cooler heads could then prevail, but not if an attack occurs, the public is not gonna give the brown guy the same pass that they gave to Bushco.

[highprincipleswork]

32. Scared out of our wits.

First of all, when did we ever miss someone with explosives inside their pants? We didn't. And, in fact, this particular terrorist was caught outside this country. So, we're going to be reactive to everything that goes on in other countries, with their security systems also? That will end in us totally becoming the slaves to our fears, rather than adherents to our principles and our Constitution and our Declaration of Independence.

There is simply no end to the lengths one will go when one is gripped by terror. And apparently we are. So, there you have it, the terrorists have already won. Because what could be juicier, if you were a terrorist, to install so much terror inside of a people that they wet themselves and destroy their Constitution and spend insane amounts of money on wars they can never really win.

The only solution, people, is to get a grip, however you can. We should probably hold mass de-traumatizing clinics, based on the actions of fellow citizens.

I admit, I have a hard time sometimes being compassionate towards this. And we should be. The events of 9-11, suspicious to the max though they are, were horrendous and heartbreaking.

But shouldn't box cutters have been caught with simple metal detectors? Can you believe so many of them got through and that untrained pilots could run around all over the U.S. pretty much as they wanted before they crashed planes into the WTC, twice, and the Pentagon! Doesn't this seem like an extraordinary event to you, unbelievable even?

Let's not let our horrific memories of that day cause us to be cowards and to desert our principles. We've got to find a way out of 9-11 induced trauma, or we will never be an intelligent thinking, civilized nation with principles ever again.

[Eric J in MN]

57. Box cutters were allowed on planes until after the 9/11/2001 attack. NT

NT