by Karen Famighetti
An
article that appeared on Fox Nation today bore the title, "Obama admits he has no clue how intrusive TSA searches are" and linked to
this USA Today article, entitled, "Obama calls airport pat-downs frustrating but necessary." The Fox Nation item also included a partial video of remarks Obama made today in Lisbon about the new TSA security procedures.
<...>
In fact, as the full transcript of Obama's comments shows, Obama never "admit
he has no clue how intrusive TSA searches are." Rather, after Obama acknowledged that he doesn't "go through security checks to get on planes these days," so he hasn't "personally experienced some of the procedures that have been put in place by TSA," he said "what I've said to the TSA is that you have to constantly refine and measure whether what we're doing is the only way to assure the American people's safety. And you also have to think through, 'Are there ways of doing it that are less intrusive?'"
Obama later added: "(E)very week I meet with my counterterrorism team and I'm constantly asking them whether is what we're doing absolutely necessary? Have we thought it through? Are there other ways of accomplishing it that meet the same objectives?"
Fox Nation later altered the article's title to "President Defends Touching Junk But Makes a Confession..."
From Obama's remarks in Lisbon:
With respect to the TSA, let me first of all make a confession. I don't go through security checks to get on planes these days. So I haven't personally experienced some of the procedures that have been put in place by TSA. I will also say that in the aftermath of the Christmas day bombing, our TSA personnel are properly under enormous pressure to make sure that you don't have somebody slipping on a plane with some sort of explosive device on their persons. And since the explosive device that was on Mr. Abdulmutallab was not detected by ordinary metal detectors, it has meant that TSA has had to try to adapt to make sure that passengers on planes are safe.
Now that's a tough situation. One of the most frustrating aspects of this fight against terrorism is that it has created a whole security apparatus around us that causes huge inconvenience, for all of us. And I understand people's frustrations. And what I've said to the TSA is that you have to constantly refine and measure whether what we're doing is the only way to assure the American people's safety.
And you also have to think through, "Are there ways of doing it that are less intrusive?" But, at this point, TSA in consultation with our counterterrorism experts have indicated to me that the procedures that they've been put going place are the only ones right now that they consider to be effective against the kind of threat we saw in the Christmas day bombing. But I'm gonna -- every week I meet with my counterterrorism team and I'm constantly asking them whether is what we're doing absolutely necessary? Have we thought it through? Are there other ways of accomplishing it that meet the same objectives?
On the Republican side:
GOP FLOATS TSA PRIVATIZATION....In recent months, we've heard Republicans raise the specter of privatizing a wide variety of services. Social Security, Medicare, Veterans Administration hospitals, and even the Centers for Disease Control all became targets.
But as travelers grow more frustrated with heightened airport security, it appears Republicans are
opening a new front on the privatization crusade.
A Republican lawmaker, who is faulting big government spending, is suggesting that airports dump the Transportation Security Administration altogether, and opt instead to privatize security.
And some airports, fed up with poor service in a climate where travelers are outraged about the prospect of full-body scanners, are listening.
The consideration comes after Florida Republican Rep. John Mica -- a longtime critic of the TSA -- wrote letters to the country's 100 busiest airports earlier this month asking them to switch to private security.
Mica is poised to become chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, so he'll be in a position to advance this issue.
There are a variety of angles to consider here. Note, for example, that private companies that stand to benefit from privatization also happen to be generous campaign contributors to Mica's re-election campaign.
Even more importantly, several domestic airports already use private screeners, but it's still the TSA that establishes mandatory security standards. If Mica or other Republicans want to have a conversation about whether those security measures are appropriate, that's fine. But whether those doing the screening are public employees or private contractors doesn't change the standards themselves. Selling this as some sort of cure-all for frustrated travelers is silly.
<...>
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
