Privacy

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
searches, tsa



TSA Told To Tell Children That Groping Them Is A Game... Horrifying Sex Abuse Experts

from the that's-not-a-game dept

Apparently TSA agents are being told that one way to handle the new groping pat downs for children is to try to make it out to be some sort of "game." This is apparently horrifying some sex abuse experts who point out that a common tactic in abuse cases is to tell the kids that they're just "playing a game." The TSA has said that the newer patdowns will not apply to children under 12, but the rules have been somewhat unclear -- leading to the statement from a TSA director, James Marchand:
"You try to make it as best you can for that child to come through. If you can come up with some kind of a game to play with a child, it makes it a lot easier."
He also said that the idea of making it a game would become a part of the TSA's training. Ken Wooden, who runs an organization to try to stop sex abuse of children was not pleased:
"How can experts working at the TSA be so incredibly misinformed and misguided to suggest that full body pat downs for children be portrayed as a game?" Wooden asked in an email. "To do so is completely contrary to what we in the sexual abuse prevention field have been trying to accomplish for the past thirty years."

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Dark Helmet (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 8:35am

    How dumb are these people?

    Right. Tell kids that full patdowns are a game. Nevermind all the legitimate concerns over personal liberty and privacy invasion of adults....what are they going to do when legions of kids start trying to play this "game" with one another, imitating the authoritarian way the TSA agents behave?

    Little Girl: Why are you touching me there? I don't like this!

    Little Boy: Don't worry, this is just a game I learned at the airport. Now hold still.

    LG: No! I don't like this!

    LB: You MUST complete this game or you'll get in trouble! We can't stop now that it's started!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 8:52am

      Re: How dumb are these people?

      Instead of playing doctor, they're playing TSA agent.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:05am

      Re: How dumb are these people?

      I'll click 'funny' because there's no button for 'horrifying'.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Free Capitalist (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:54am

      Re: How dumb are these people?

      Hehe... for me that's second time today Brave New World came rushing back to memory.

      Aldous was right.

      What was the line... something like: "could you imagine a world where the children couldn't engage in erotic play?"

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:21pm

      Re: How dumb are these people?

      I am horrified and outraged that you people are so clueless. Stop making dumb jokes about a grave matter like this! America is at war, and the front line is drawn right through little Suzie's woo-woo. Groping little girls is a game we mustn't lose!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 4 Dec 2010 @ 11:20am

      Re: How dumb are these people?

      Instead of snide remark, try to appreciate the difficult compromise between privacy and security that the government is trying to achieve. in absence of clear guidelines, it has to grope for the right balance.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Not an electronic Rodent, 4 Dec 2010 @ 6:48pm

        Re: Re: How dumb are these people?

        difficult compromise between privacy and security [snip] , it has to grope for the right balance.
        Seriously? Well maybe... let's see... practically no privacy, practically no security.
        Hmm yep I guess that's balanced. Well done to the government for achieving balance. *polite faux-clap*

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 5 Dec 2010 @ 10:53pm

          Re: Re: Re: How dumb are these people?

          Did you miss the "grope" joke in there or did I miss something in your reply????

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    crade (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 8:47am

    Yikes, remind me not to fly with children.
    I guess driving is considered a priviledge too right.. I wonder if they will put up random kid-groping checkstops on the roads soon.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:11am

      Re:

      They're coming to subway and train stations next...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Travis Miller (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:36am

      Re:

      No, railways are next. This past July USA TODAY reported "TSA chief John Pistole to put priority on rail, subways".

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:07am

      Re:

      I wonder if they will put up random kid-groping checkstops on the roads soon.

      Why not? You do know that the 9-11 terrorists used roadways to get to the airport, right? Terrorists must be stopped wherever they are! Now, tell you daughter to drop her panties and bend over for the nice man with the badge.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      btr1701 (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 2:34pm

      Re: Cars

      It wasn't a groping checkpoint, but I did end up caught in traffic for 50 minutes in L.A. two weeks ago because they were stopping all the cars and running "security checks" on the drivers and passengers.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    VoicesInMyHead (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:16am

    The Asphalt Ribbon

    I know this is a huge issue, and the loss of liberty is staggering, but I've placed myself on a personal no-fly list until the madness stops... IF it stops.

    I'm fortunate that I rarely need to travel for work, but if I do, I will drive, period. The vacation plans have been modified to allow for driving time, and if the destination is too far to get there and back, then the local businesses can count the dollars I would have spent as a loss, due to the TSA policies.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      crade (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:18am

      Re: The Asphalt Ribbon

      Because being able to move around freely is a priviledge, not a right.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:22am

        Re: Re: The Asphalt Ribbon

        Because being able to move around freely is a priviledge, not a right.

        In a totalitarian state, yes.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        jasper (profile), 4 Dec 2010 @ 11:48am

        Re: Re: The Asphalt Ribbon

        Are you serious? Travel has been recognized as a RIGHT since the Magna Carta, you freaking imbecile.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Lora Ellis, 4 Dec 2010 @ 1:46pm

        Re: Re: The Asphalt Ribbon

        Maybe you should read the constitution.

        Preamble:
        We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

        Amendment 4:
        The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Brion Emde, 4 Dec 2010 @ 4:53pm

        Re: Re: The Asphalt Ribbon

        I can't tell if you're being facetious or not. The right to travel is described as:

        The Right To Travel

        As the Supreme Court notes in Saenz v Roe, 98-97 (1999), the Constitution does not contain the word "travel" in any context, let alone an explicit right to travel (except for members of Congress, who are guaranteed the right to travel to and from Congress). The presumed right to travel, however, is firmly established in U.S. law and precedent. In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In fact, in Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all." It is interesting to note that the Articles of Confederation had an explicit right to travel; it is now thought that the right is so fundamental that the Framers may have thought it unnecessary to include it in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.

        here: http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#travel

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 29 Dec 2010 @ 5:35pm

          Re: Re: Re: The Asphalt Ribbon

          What is imprisonment if not a confinement? It is having your right to freely move about restricted. It is denying a person access to the ability to move freely. And last time I checked, a person can only be stripped of that RIGHT to be able to move freely by being convicted of a crime. "Travel" is just another word for moving freely. Travelers are not criminals. Forcing people to give up some of their rights in order to exercise others of their rights goes against everything we, as a country, are supposed to stand for.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 7 Dec 2010 @ 9:03am

        Re: Re: The Asphalt Ribbon

        Your an idiot

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Max Factor, 29 Dec 2010 @ 2:24pm

        Re: Re: The Asphalt Ribbon

        Actually being able to move around freely is a right.But no for long.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:21am

      Re: The Asphalt Ribbon

      I'm fortunate that I rarely need to travel for work, but if I do, I will drive, period.

      You're lucky. Many people's employers require them to fly, period. Refusal to do so would result in unemployment, period.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Wayfinder (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:25am

    Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

    Are these people totally insane? What we are seeing here is uber-paranoia at its worst. It has gotten to the point that the TSA itself has become the terrorists.

    I am as much for airport security as anyone else... but there is NOTHING about this current situation that is logical, sensible or right. This is wrong in so many ways, we have to wonder who is making $$$$ off this airport scanner deal.

    One would have to believe there is a way to scan people quickly and efficiently without their picture potentially winding up on the internet or being drooled over by a perv security guard. Someone here is absolutely not thinking.

    That said however, it should be realized that security scanner guards... after seeing thousands of such scans every day... would become extremely jaded to these things. We don't complain when a doctor sees us naked. So why are people so extremely vehement about this issue?

    It seems there is lack of common sense, and over-reaction, on all sides of this issue. Myself, I will be willing to step through a simple scanner check and avoid the entire patdown process. And if a picture of me appears anywhere, I will sue the airport involved to the last available dime. If they're willing to take that risk... then I feel they're confident enough in the scanner system and how it works.

    Anyone out there want to tell their doctor he can't see them naked? Maybe the TSA needs to wise up (as in get a grain of sanity people)... and maybe the general public needs to stop going drama queen over what is an apparently necessary step IF they want actual security.

    Security or freedom folks; we can't have both. We've screamed about terrorism and planes (probably to paranoia pitch) and have empowered the government to take what is in truth probably ridiculously excessive steps. So we need to either remove that empowerment (which frankly is probably not going to happen)... or live with the consequences. When push comes to shove... most likely a harmless scan is not all that major an issue.

    Not my call and frankly, I don't care. I *do* care that groping children would be referred to as a game. The person who came up with that concept needs to be removed from his position... now. He obviously is not capable of rational judgment.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      jilocasin (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:53am

      Re: Now you see the _real_reason_ for the over the top patdowns....

      Wayfinder:
      "Myself, I will be willing to step through a simple scanner check and avoid the entire patdown [sic] process."

      That simple sentence sums up the entire reasoning behind these _over_the_top_ 'pat downs'.

      The TSA knew that they couldn't _force_ everyone to submit to their enhanced, privacy stripping, humiliating, potentially health threatening new machines. If too many people opted out then there wouldn't be any reason to keep them.

      (I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine the correct mix of authoritarian abuse and outright greed that lead to the installations of these machines to begin with.)

      It was no coincidence that these 'enhanced pat downs' showed up just as the TSA announced that these scanners would become the _primary_ new security mechanism. If they made the alternative to being scanned, uncomfortable, humiliating, and utterly horrific, then people would gladly submit to being 'scanned' just to avoid the pat downs. "Wayfinder" has shown that for a portion of the populace, things are working according to plan.

      The TSA's plan is no better than handing over your money, or being violated by a criminal if the alternative is getting shot. Worse, because it's the government that's violating us.

      "Isn't it much better to be violated by this machine than to let Bruno have his way with your wife and children. So few people have 'opted out' today and Bruno really enjoys redheads with braces. Oh... you've changed your mind... Bruno will be sooooo.. disappointed. Just step inside. Yes, now smile, your scan might make it into this years calendar edition. What? Oh, nothing.", says the friendly TSA supervisor.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Eugene (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:57pm

        Re: Re: Now you see the _real_reason_ for the over the top patdowns....

        Yeah, exactly. No matter how obnoxious the pat down is, it will never ever trump the potential dangers of those scanning machines. Visual records, radiation exposure. It's a nightmare.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      lbwmoo (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:53am

      Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

      Security or freedom folks; we can't have both.

      And why not? The current incarnation of the TSA gives us neither I'll say. The "security" measures that have been put in place are complete nonsense. Vote with your dollars on this, and simply refuse to fly. A medically unstudied scanner or what would amount to, outside of this situation, a sexual assault is not a good set of options. Since there are no good options currently, don't fly. Don't opt-out, opt not to fly. Sure driving is a lot lenthier, and requires more effort on your part, but it beats the other options. And when a doctor sees me naked, they are a trained medical professional that is doing what I am asking them to do, diagnose a problem that I went to them inquring about. I don't care that a TSA agent probably becomes jaded when seeing thousands of images, it's the principal of the matter. They have no right to see my body simply because I wish to take part in a completely legal activity, which isn't even legal in the sense that drinking is legal, you can do it but if done under the wrong circumstances can lower judgement and allow you to do something stupid that kills someone. This is entering a metal tube with wings, sitting, and standing up in a different place. Transportation should not require me to expose myself to a stranger, and I empathize for the parents out there who will probably be arrested after standing up for their and their children's rights not to be groped.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Dennis, 3 Dec 2010 @ 10:18am

        Re: Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

        I so Agree with this individuals opinion on this issue. Choose not to fly and take longer to get to where you want to go, or don't go at all. If you don't like these very simple options then don't complain either. Also do letter writing and emailing while you're upset about the issue at hand. OH and voting does make a difference too. Sad to say; a fast fix on this is not in the cards.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          crade (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 10:24am

          Re: Re: Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

          I will never leave my cell. That'l show em.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:39am

          Re: Re: Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

          Choose not to fly and take longer to get to where you want to go, or don't go at all. If you don't like these very simple options then don't complain either.

          And get fired. Great solution there, Mr. Fascist.

          Also do letter writing and emailing while you're upset about the issue at hand.

          Better send lots of cash with those letters if you want anyone to care.

          OH and voting does make a difference too.

          You know, they have voting in China, Iran and many other places, too. They even had it in the USSR and Nazi Germany. Yeah, voting makes all the difference.

          Sad to say; a fast fix on this is not in the cards.

          Not if you apologists can prevent it.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 4:37pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

            Thank you for that oh-so-constructive criticism. If the options given do not appeal to you, please, feel free to offer other options.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Lora Ellis, 4 Dec 2010 @ 1:51pm

          Re: Re: Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

          Unfortunately though, there are few ways to get some places. My husband and I are planning to move overseas to work at an orphanage. How is our family supposed to get there? One cannot drive or take a train to the Philippines.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 4 Dec 2010 @ 10:21pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

            Unfortunately though, there are few ways to get some places. My husband and I are planning to move overseas to work at an orphanage. How is our family supposed to get there? One cannot drive or take a train to the Philippines.

            Swim, you lazy liberals!

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            anne, 21 Sep 2011 @ 5:26am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

            Sail.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:54am

      Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

      A doctor is a trained professional who you go to KNOWING that A) There may be personal inspections and test, B) You can sue a Doctor for malpractice if you're not properly informed before-hand, and C) Everything that happens between you and the doctor is completely confidential.

      With TSA security, you are NOT informed about the details of the inspection, they were NOT trained or employed with the expectation that they would be feeling people up, and your body scans may show up anywhere without your knowledge or consent.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 1:03pm

        Re: Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

        A doctor is a trained professional who you go to KNOWING that A) There may be personal inspections and test, B) You can sue a Doctor for malpractice if you're not properly informed before-hand, and C) Everything that happens between you and the doctor is completely confidential.


        Plus you can CHOOSE your Doctor, but you cannot choose who will "patdown" or scan you in the airport; not only that, you can REFUSE treatment with a doctor, try to refuse the TSA and they'll arrest and fine you.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          monkyyy, 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:26pm

          Re: Re: Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

          all the old men would be hogging to lines for the women who can/need to put up with the job

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Kristen Ankiewicz, 4 Dec 2010 @ 1:51am

        Re: Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

        Anonymous Coward, I couldn't agree with you more. The comparison of TSA agents to doctors is ludicrous.

        Here's another reason why one shouldn't compare TSA agents to doctors: I chose my doctor! I spent a lot of effort to choose one (JUST one) I feel comfortable with! The doctor-patient relationship is based on trust, references, and research. It's a long-term relationship. I know this doctor and can fire her at any time.

        TSA are imposed on unwary travelers with NO control over the relationship whatsoever. No trust.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 4 Dec 2010 @ 10:13pm

          Re: Re: Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

          Here's another reason why one shouldn't compare TSA agents to doctors: I chose my doctor!

          Lucky you. Not everyone has that choice. Does that make an examination wrong in your book, then?

          TSA are imposed on unwary travelers with NO control over the relationship whatsoever. No trust.

          So, if you could choose one of two agents to grope you, you'd be okay with that? Hey, you're getting to choose your agent!

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:26am

      Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

      Are these people totally insane? What we are seeing here is uber-paranoia at its worst. It has gotten to the point that the TSA itself has become the terrorists.

      It's the American sports mentality: Our team must win! We must show AQ that we can beat them at their own game! TSA for the win!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Gabriel Tane (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:41am

        Re: Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

        You've just succinctly illustrated the overlooked difference between the post-9/11 Nationalism that actually happened and the "patriotism" that it's incorrectly labeled as. I'm glad to see that a lot of that gloss is rubbing of and people are seeing that our reaction was/is knee-jerk at best and mindlessly-destructive at worst.

        It's because of the 'win win win!" mentality that we allowed so much of our basic rights to be taken away from us before we knew it.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:29am

      Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

      That said however, it should be realized that security scanner guards... after seeing thousands of such scans every day... would become extremely jaded to these things.

      Kind of like a perv with a large collection of kiddy porn, eh? After seeing enough, they just become jaded. Nothing wrong there either, huh?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Cowardly Anon, 6 Dec 2010 @ 9:11am

        Re: Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

        You know, this might come as a surprise, but the TSA agents are just regular people too. They get up and go to work and are told they HAVE to do this. They are yelled at and called pervs and people feel they must be enjoying it.

        Would you enjoy your job if you were told you had to do something so ethically and morally sketchy?

        Stop assuming that b/c they HAVE to do that they WANT to do it. That's naive and closed minded of you.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:31am

      Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

      When push comes to shove... most likely a harmless scan is not all that major an issue.

      The scans aren't harmless, Mr. Apologist.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      deerhuntr (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:23pm

      Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

      They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Nastybutler77 (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:28pm

      Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

      Security or freedom folks; we can't have both.

      According to Ben Franklin you are right, but not in the way you think.
      "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      jumazak, 3 Dec 2010 @ 3:38pm

      Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

      ""I don't know why everybody is running to buy these expensive and useless machines. I can overcome the body scanners with enough explosives to bring down a Boeing 747. That’s why we haven’t put them in our airport,” Sela said, referring to Ben Gurion International Airport, which has some of the toughest security in the world.

      Instead, Sela recommends behavioral profiling rather than random checks along with a “trusted traveler” program so that pre-approved, low-risk passengers can be quickly moved through the process.

      "You have to actually look for the things that are dangerous, and not just scan everybody," he advises. "My point is that if you know who is flying, you don’t really need to check for water bottles and nail files, but can direct more resources to looking for explosives and drugs.”

      But that might take actual expertise, which the TSA clearly doesn’t have." _BY Steve Christ, Wealth Daily

      These body scanners are just as inefficient as patdowns.
      And much more dangerous, I really don't feel safe with doing an open x-ray while the doctor hides behind a lead wall, that's what these are.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 4 Dec 2010 @ 4:46pm

      Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

      While people let doctors examine them naked, most wouldnt let them store pictures of them naked. Also, you can simply ask your doctor not to fondle your childs genitals.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Michael Pelletier, 5 Dec 2010 @ 8:31am

      Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

      This is wrong in so many ways, we have to wonder who is making $$$$ off this airport scanner deal.

      Increased Lobbying by Manufacturers of Full Body Scanners

      One company with government contracts, L3 Communications, has spent $4.3 on lobbying, up from $2.1 million in 2005. Lobbyists for L3 include Linda Daschle, the wife of former U.S. Senate majority leader Tom Daschle.

      Full Body Scanner Lobby: Michael Chertoff & Rapiscan

      Michael Chertoff, Former Secretary of Homeland Security, is the head of the Chertoff Group, the lead cheerleader for what is being called the Full Body Scanner Lobby, reports the Washington Post and the Washington Examiner. Ever since the Christmas Day Bomb Scare, Chertoff has been making the rounds championing the Full Body Scanners as a way to detect hidden explosive devices.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 6 Dec 2010 @ 12:23pm

      Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

      Security or freedom folks; we can't have both.

      Give me liberty or give me death.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 6 Dec 2010 @ 12:32pm

      Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

      We don't complain when a doctor sees us naked. So why are people so extremely vehement about this issue?

      Are you seriously going to try and draw that comparisson? On the one hand we have a liscenced professional who's expertise we have personally chosen to consult in order to preserve or restor our health. On the other hand, we have a minimally-trained, minimum-wage goon who is being imposed upon us by some third party in order to perpetrate a farce security policy which is arguably doing nothing to make anyone any safer.

      THAT is why people are so vehement about this issue.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Andrea, 7 Dec 2010 @ 6:55am

      Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

      Aside from personal liberties conflicts, I don't want to take an x-ray every time I fly. There are no long term studies of what the effects of this could be for frequent flyers and I hardly doubt I can trust the government to do the research to guarantee that its safe.

      I'd rather have freedom thanks. There is a way worse chance of engine failure in a plane than a terrorist attack. It's sick that they use the threat of terrorism and 911 as a way to slowly take away our civil liberties. There is no such thing as security in life and freedoms when lost are near impossible to regain.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 29 Dec 2010 @ 5:29pm

      Re: Groping children is insanity--and itself terrorism

      "Security or freedom folks; we can't have both."

      FREEDOM. If you would rather have security, go live in Europe.

      Those who trade a little freedom for a little security deserve NEITHER.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Tetsubo, 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:25am

    I'm a survivor of sexual abuse. This policy disgusts me on so many levels. The man that public stated this needs to be fired and fired NOW. No one and I mean NO ONE should touch a minor in this manner other than a parent or a medical professional at the request of a parent. Keep your groping hands off of America's kids TSA!

    Could someone please return our 4th amendment rights? It seems that they have been stolen...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:43am

      Re:

      Could someone please return our 4th amendment rights? It seems that they have been stolen...

      Rights only amount to what the Supreme Court says they do. People wanted a more conservative SC that wouldn't let "rights" get in the way of big business and big govt. Well, they got it.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Chargone (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 2:34pm

        Re: Re:

        you do realise that that's only actually 'conservative' if it's already the staus quo, right? otherwise it's technically either 'progressive' or 'reactionary', depending on whether it was like that before or not. (reactionary being if it was, progressive being if it's not.)

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        btr1701 (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 2:40pm

        Re: Re: Court

        > People wanted a more conservative SC that wouldn't let "rights"
        > get in the way of big business and big govt.

        The Supreme Court had nothing to do with this policy. It was conceived and implemented by a liberal Democrat administration and Congress.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 2:46pm

          Re: Re: Re: Court

          The Supreme Court had nothing to do with this policy.

          Saying that The Supreme Court has no power to restrict government policies is both ignorant and dishonest. Congratulations, you win twice!

          It was conceived and implemented by a liberal Democrat administration and Congress.

          And conservatives as well. You left that part out. Hey, you're a triple winner now!

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            btr1701, 5 Dec 2010 @ 12:36am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Court

            > Saying that the Supreme Court has no power to restrict government
            > policies is both ignorant and dishonest.

            You might have a point if I'd actually said any such thing. Since I did not, it seems you're the dishonest one here.

            The Supreme Court can only restrict the government by ruling on a case brought before it. It can't take any action on it's own volition. So until someone sues the TSA and the case works its way up from the district court, through the courts of appeal, and is granted certiorari by the Supreme Court, they can't do anything about these policies.

            > And conservatives as well.

            Well, no, not really. Until the election a few weeks ago, the Democrats controlled the White House and both houses of Congress. The conservatives didn't have the votes to implement anything.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 6 Dec 2010 @ 8:54am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Court

              > Saying that the Supreme Court has no power to restrict government
              > policies is both ignorant and dishonest.

              You might have a point if I'd actually said any such thing. Since I did not, it seems you're the dishonest one here.


              Oh really? Lets see, right up above you said "The Supreme Court had nothing to do with this policy." Now, I'd say that the Supreme Court's previous rulings approving of the government's taking away of civil liberties in the name of "law enforcement" and "security" had a whole lot to do with this policy being implemented. Being a power-hungry federal cop yourself, of course you'd like to deny that. And most people know that cops are notorious liars anyway (another privilege the courts have bestowed upon them). No, you are indeed the dishonest one here. Perhaps you're just so used to it that you can't even see it anymore.

              The Supreme Court can only restrict the government by ruling on a case brought before it.

              And, like I said, it's previous rulings have led to what we have today. But I really wouldn't expect anything but denial from the likes of you.

              > And conservatives as well.

              Well, no, not really. Until the election a few weeks ago, the Democrats controlled the White House and both houses of Congress. The conservatives didn't have the votes to implement anything.


              The so-called conservatives have mostly gone right along with this. And it was Bush and his bunch that established these agencies, fanned the flames of paranoia, instituted torture, declared the right to hold people indefinitely without trial, etc.. Maybe you were too busy polishing your badge and watching Fox news to catch any of that.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      SLK8ne, 5 Dec 2010 @ 2:33pm

      Re: Tetsubo

      Agreed!

      Sooner or later they're going to try this BS on someone who was raped or sexually abused and they're going to loose agents.

      Not that the TSA cares. These jerk offs (literal in this case) are expendable.

      And you're right, our 4th amendment rights have been stolen. I fear it may require the people of this country taking them back.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Hephaestus (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:33am

    I am so enjoying this three stooges expansion of federal authority.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Arabella, 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:46am

    Ugh

    I hate all of this security crap, I pretty much choose to no longer fly. I'm sure that choice is all principal, and has nothing to do with my lack of funds to buy tickets to fly.

    The liquid ban was the straw that broke this camel's back. I remember the movie "Live Wire" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104743/ so the 2 part secret special liquid bomb plot just made laugh.

    But for everyone gnashing their teeth about the "Children" should Security Theater not check kids because we believe that terrorists will draw the line at using children? I think all the groping is stupid, and telling kids it's a game is REALLY stupid. Tell them yes it is an invasion of their tiny privacy, but they want to fly to see grandma, and so to make everyone else on the plane feel safe they have to suffer. The greater good and all that. (You can tell I'm not a parent.) I say you let your little rug rat scream it's heart out, get a really good hissy fit going, the kind that makes everyone around uncomfortable. A plane full of people can now feel safe that one child is not carrying explosives, or box cutters, or a few too many ounces of Kool Aid in it's sippy cup, but now they will have to fly in that same said safe plane with a hyped, up pissed off screaming (rightfully so, righteously so)child.

    I'm waiting for the next security panic to be about how neither pat downs nor the naked scanner, show body cavities. I bet terrorists can't wait to start (talking about) stuffing C4 up their rectums, hey it works with heroin.

    How compliant will sheeple be when for "Americas Safety" you need to bend over for the "Fickle Finger of Freedom"

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 10:07am

      Re: Ugh

      I was reading your post, winding up to write a long response disagreeing with you, but as I finished I realized I agree with you. That would be one hell of a protest, teach the kids what is right and what is not, then let them freak the fuck out when someone tries to do that to them.

      "I bet terrorists can't wait to start (talking about) stuffing C4 up their rectum"

      How much explosives can fit into the human stomach? With someone who's not planing on surviving the attach, that seems like the next step. I wonder of a TSA approved stomach pump would be enough to get people to protest in mass.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Megan, 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:11pm

      Re: Ugh

      At this point, the TSA agents better have a medical degree... I don't expect a rectal exam from anyone other than a doctor...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    danbntx (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:47am

    Cmon it's Cowboys and Indians on Thanksgiving, pat downs at the door were very common then :p

    Just tell the kids the truth, that radical terrorists are why we endure this

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:47am

    Perverts

    The people who run the TSA and Homeland Security are nothing more than perverts and pedophiles. This is sick.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Mark, 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:48am

    Wayfinder is right. However, I'm afraid that this sort of thing is probably only going to continue to get worse in the future. And it is not going to stop, and it's not going to get better. Ever. This is how travel in the post 20th century works, and people are either going to tolerate it, or not travel. Simple. Unfortunately, there's enough people who actually have a need to travel regularly that the number of people who might decide not to on account of these changes cannot effectively stop them through any sort of impermanent boycott.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    V, 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:51am

    This is why...

    And this is why the Constituation (Bill of Rights actually) guartunees us the right to bear arms.

    It wasn't to protect ourselves - although they can certainly be used for that. It was so that the people who possess the means to overthrow a government that has become so blatantly corrupt that is defies any test of sanity.

    Sadly, our government past that point a long time ago, and because they were allowed to continue - unchallenged by its citizens - they pressed further and further.

    The government have BECOME the terrorist. We turn to one terrorist to protect us from another.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:44am

      Re: This is why...

      Actaully I'd argue it was so you can defend yourself.

      You have a right to defend yourself. You have a right to Organize and Assemble. You don't have a right to impose your will upon another (even a blatently corrupt self-serving politician) by violence or any other means.

      Secession or Cessation is something that should be considered when establishing a government.

      Queue the invetible civil war comments...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:54pm

        Re: Re: This is why...

        The written reason for the second amendment is so we can defend our country by forming a militia, the added benefit is self defense. The real reason it's there is so the citizens can revolt against a corrupt government. It's not written in the constitution, it's written in the papers about the constitution by our forefathers. You don't remember hearing the line "the government should be afraid of it's citizens"?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 3 Dec 2010 @ 2:14pm

      Re: This is why...

      And this is why the Constituation (Bill of Rights actually) guartunees us the right to bear arms.

      More bullshit empty posturing from the gun nuts. This “right to bear arms” of yours has done nothing to rein in the excesses of your Government. It’s just a distraction to keep you preoccupied with demonstrating how “free” you are, while one by one, your real rights are being stolen away.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 4:48pm

        Re: Re: This is why...

        UNtil all those guns are turned on the government, as they are ultimately meant to be.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 10 Dec 2010 @ 7:54pm

          Re: This is why...

          Yeah, and how successful was the last time that happened? Your Civil War didn’t go at all well for the side that fired the first shot, as I recall.

          The trouble with shooting at the Government, is that it need have no moral qualms about shooting back. It is the peaceful demonstrations that tend to be more effective—look at Mahatma Gandhi. Because those that shoot at them immediately look like the bad guys that they are.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    interval (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 9:59am

    Wow.

    Just "Wow."

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Gracey (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 10:02am

    ...said before. I made sure my own kids know stuff like and they will never fly with my grandkids. Not in the US anyway.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    keith (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 10:03am

    "How can experts working at the TSA be so incredibly misinformed and misguided..."

    Uh ... they work for the TSA? What part of their track record would hint at informative, thoughtful, and appropriate decisions?

    Let's see:
    1) Vague and impossible directives
    2) Zero accountability
    3) Nearly unlimited budget
    4) Nearly unlimited power

    ....sounds like a recipe for success...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Skippy T. Mut, 3 Dec 2010 @ 10:08am

    I believe...

    ...TSA director, James Marchand should have to register as a sex offender.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Uncle Paul, 3 Dec 2010 @ 10:14am

    What's so bad?

    Come on, all kids like playing games.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    johnny canada, 3 Dec 2010 @ 10:16am

    Before some post the Benjamin Franklin quote

    Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.
    Martin Luther King Jr.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Jeffrey, 3 Dec 2010 @ 10:50am

    Wayfinder: "That said however, it should be realized that security scanner guards... after seeing thousands of such scans every day... would become extremely jaded to these things. We don't complain when a doctor sees us naked. So why are people so extremely vehement about this issue?"

    A: People can choose a doctor. My wife has a female doctor for a reason.

    B: Porn addicts see thousands of naked women too. Doesnt mean I want them to see my wife and daughters nor do I think they become jaded.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Pedobear, 3 Dec 2010 @ 10:56am

    I don't see a problem

    IJS

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Stacey, 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:00am

    Welcome to Nazi America. Call your congressional representatives and senators. Make sure to call Senator Lieberman's office as he is the chairman for the Senate Committee on Homeland Security.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:04am

    Fun times!

    Okay kids. It's time to play hide the pickle.

    Freakin' sickos!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Wayfinder (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:09am

    Jeffrey: "People can choose a doctor".

    True, and valid point. But we don't object to an unknown emergency room doctor do we?

    Anonymous: "A doctor is a trained professional"

    And if the TSA is going to employ these devices... so should be ALL security personnel. They should go through intensive training, not only in use of these devices, but in ethics as well. They should go through aberrant personality tests to insure they are relatively stable individuals to start with. If that is NOT being done... then that is a problem, to be sure.

    "Security or freedom folks; we can't have both." "Why not?"

    Because this is a well-known situation. The more security a society insists upon, the more personal freedoms it must be willing to abandon to obtain that security. Since airplane security is bordering at this point on obsessive... the loss of personal freedoms are going to be proportional. If we don't like this... then Americans need to stand up and make it known that too many freedoms are being impacted-- and then be willing to accept lessened security. We have to choose. We can't have total security with no loss of freedom. We can't have total freedom without loss of some security. Myself, I opt for reasonable security, and reasonable freedom. It's a matter of balance.

    Jilocasin: "That simple sentence sums up the entire reasoning behind these _over_the_top_ 'pat downs'."

    Agreed... and let me re-state my actual intention. I am *personally* willing to go through a scanner, period, if it means it will eliminate the chance of someone sneaking a bomb aboard a plane. I don't see a scanner as being that intrusive. I think the pat-downs are inexcusable any way you look at it. An alternative: if you don't want a scan... you don't fly. Too many people want to have their cake and eat it to. There is very seldom any perfect solution.

    I do agree, 100%, that the TSA seems to have some kind of God-complex and is so out of touch with reality it's inexcusable. But then, that describes government in general, world wide. I didn't mean to imply that I am willing to undergo a scan instead of a virtual rape (although that is certainly the case). I mean I don't personally find a scan all that unreasonable. (Someone mentioned potential health problems. I know nothing about that-- have these things been thoroughly tested?)

    I seriously have to question this whole concept of "we have a solution and it's going to be implemented nation wide, right now, and the American Public has no say in it whatsoever. LOL. When did we become a military state, anyway?

    A friend of mine mentioned something else interesting: So okay, a guy doesn't sneak into a plane with a bomb on his belt. Instead, he walks into a much more crowded airport and takes out 1000 people instead of 200. Or he walks into a mall at Christmas rush hour. Or he detonates in a crowded hospital waiting room or... or.. or...

    What are we going to have next, checkpoints at local grocery stores? Just how far does "security" go... and how much are we empowering people that really do not need to be empowered any more than they already are?

    Just because a person is in charge doesn't mean he's sane.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Steven (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:59am

      Re:

      "(Someone mentioned potential health problems. I know nothing about that-- have these things been thoroughly tested?)"

      No they have not been tested. There have been some reports that the radiation type and level will increase risk for breast cancer in women and cause birth defects (by altering male seamen). Also the TSA personnel are not allowed to wear radiation badges, something that is required in all other situations in which you work with radioactive scans, so there is no data for how much exposure they get.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      jilocasin (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:49pm

      Uggggg.....

      Wayfinder:
      "I am *personally* willing to go through a scanner, period, if it means it will eliminate the chance of someone sneaking a bomb aboard a plane."

      More power to you. Unfortunately, what little evidence that does exist shows that the 'enhanced scanners' wouldn't have detected they type of explosive it's supposedly been rolled out to protect us against. Heck, it has problems if your clothes have too many pleats. So you can proudly submit to a process that _won't_ eliminate the chance of someone sneaking a bomb aboard a plane.

      Wayfinder:
      "They should go through intensive training, not only in use of these devices, but in ethics as well. They should go through aberrant personality tests to insure they are relatively stable individuals to start with. If that is NOT being done... then that is a problem, to be sure."

      Well, there's another problem. Techdirt itself not too long ago ran the story that there is little of any training at all. The few lucky ones that do get training, get training on scanners that aren't anything like the ones they are using. The rest are encouraged to sign the forms claiming they've received training, in lieu of any _actual_ training. So there goes your "ER Doctor" analogy.

      It's impossible to prevent a determined lone operative from killing someone if he's willing to die in the attempt. That's just a fact of life.

      What we are seeing is Security Theater at its worse. Corporate Fascism run a muck.

      The TSA and all of it's ridiculousness hasn't stopped a single airplane terrorist plot.

      Go ahead, reread that last sentence, I'll wait. It didn't stop the shoe bomber, the undie bomber, the printer bomber, the liquid bomber, and it won't stop whatever idiotic plot some deranged individual comes up with next. So remember that while you watch some 4 year old, or a crippled 87 year old abused and humiliated.

      Want to know what would actually help? Aside from running around overseas giving people more reasons to hate America that is.

      Improve emergency response. Better police, fire, ambulances will minimize the impact of any successful terrorist attack regardless of where it happens (airport, shopping mall, subway, etc.)

      Improve basic intelligence gathering and dissemination. What caught the liquid bomber? Good old fashioned detective work. We knew about 9/11 before it happened. We just failed to connect the dots. The wrong people knew and we didn't do anything about it.

      Encourage people to stand up for themselves. That's what stopped the final plane on 9/11. That's what stopped the shoe bomber and the undie bomber. Not the TSA, other passengers that said to themselves, "that isn't right" and felt empowered to do something about it.

      You want to protect planes specifically? Install a metal detector, a few random bomb sniffing dogs, trained (I mean really trained, not TSA trained) armed guards. That will allow you to catch the 'low hanging fruit'. Which in the end, the only type of terrorist this might possibly catch. The dumb and the simplistic.

      Add background checks for pilots and the crews that man or service the planes. Reinforced cockpit doors to keep any one who happens to 'loose it' regardless of whether they happen to be a terrorist away from the planes controls.

      There you go. About as safe as you can reasonably expect to be in the modern world.

      No spending a gazillion dollars.
      No civil liberty violations.
      No humiliation and degredation.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 1:52pm

      Re:

      People should use undies with this written on them in metallic ink "Do not touch this!" or "Don't touch my junk!"

      I'm sure the machine will make the rest.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 6 Dec 2010 @ 8:17am

      Re:

      Now you're starting to see where this he heading and asking the relevant questions that could get others thinking about these situations more closely. Expect the men in black to show up at your door at any moment.....

      I could just be a nut-job conspiracy theorist, but even a stopped watch is right twice a day...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Red, 14 Apr 2011 @ 11:38pm

      Re:

      Funny you should say that abotu training. After a search, I found a Q$A page that asks that very question.

      Q.What kind of training do TSA agents undergo?

      A. Security officers conducting pat-downs receive 5 hours of formal training and 5 hours of on-the-job training. Officers operating the full-body scanners get 2 1/2 days of classroom training and 8 hours on-the-job training.

      Doesn't sound very 'intensive', does it?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    el_segfaulto (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:20am

    Just one question...

    Would ANY of these measures have prevented 9/11? If now then what exactly is the point other than to justify the existence of yet another government agency.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      notthejones (profile), 4 Dec 2010 @ 4:26pm

      Re: Just one question...

      No none of these measures would have stopped 9/11. Our government is responsible for 9/11 and with all the available information to be gleaned from the internet and we have remained so blind. Our own government set that up, used remote airplanes and killed and terrified that day!
      Our government was set up to represent the people, unfortunately, they are not for the people, by the people, in fact even the right to bear arms cannot save us from this government and all the Nazi-Germany-like impositions they have been putting on us resulting in numerous civil liberties being drowned. I don't think we could even over-throw the government, which as a United States citizen, is our responsibility to step up when our government is too far ahead of itself. This is clear and has been clear for the last 40 years.
      Ugh!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    RussK (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:28am

    The next thing

    Note that there are "only" 350+ of these wize bang scanners in operation right now (only 1 that I know of at PHX for example). It does take longer to go through these scanners (my time was about 20 sec. and then since i was "too tall" they still had to check me). It doesn't take much to realize that to cover everyone and not spend huge amounts of $$, we will be hearing that you now need to allow 3 hours before flight time rather than 2 so all of us can have a turn being naked.

    Of course, one other concern is that you have to empty all items from any pockets and can't be carring anything in your hands. That meant that I had to give up control of my boarding pass (minor) and also my passport (major). I can deal with packing my watch, cell phone etc. into my carry-on bag before going trhough the x-ray machine but you need the ID for the TSA. This is a rip-off situation just waiting to happen.

    Of course, we've always had an issue with being patted down and not having control of the carry-on for however long that takes (it can go for several minutes if a TSA agent is not immediately available). All that time and my laptop is just sitting at the exit of the x-ray machine, often out of my sight just waiting for someone to help themselves.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    The Pope, 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:37am

    Just have the childrens patdowns done by hired church officials... nothing bad could come of it..

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Jeffrey, 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:48am

    Wayfinder: "True, and valid point. But we don't object to an unknown emergency room doctor do we?"

    A: The problem people have is not strictly fear of being seen nude. There is a health aspect too.

    B: If a doctor told me they needed to see me naked everytime I went I would object and there is a HIGH probability they would end up with a malpractice suit from not just myself.

    The last time a doctor saw me naked was at my request. They ensured there was a third party in the room to protect them against false claims and I was told what they had to do and gave my consent. If I told a doctor that they did not have my consent to touch me or to see me naked they would have no legal grounds to do so.

    On a side note I work in medical education and have seen how doctors are informed of these issues.

    I will teach my children that if they do not want to be touched or to be seen naked by ANYONE, doctor, security agent, police, babysitter, etc to say NO. Period. Anything after that is assault.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    mike allen (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 11:53am

    i read an article that gay TSA agent are getting areal kick out of this sorry cant find it on line. but surely you could report the TSA agent as a peodo to other authorities I would.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Kimberly, 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:05pm

    Wow.

    This has single handedly undone what every parent is (should be) teaching their children. I have told my 4 year old I don't know how many times that the only people who can see her naked or touch her is us or her doctor when we are there. They are on the way to making children think it is OKAY for strangers to touch them in a bad way. Getting a pat down as an adult is completely different. We have the choice to fly (for the most part) and we can understand and comprehend what is going on. We can answer questions and talk to these agents. Children cannot. With my husband being military, we will always be flying somewhere for at least the next 10 years. We could drive, but as it stands right this second, we would be driving under water to get back to the mainland. So the "you don't have to fly" kinda goes out the window when the military is paying for us to fly to where ever they are sending us.

    Next time we fly, I'll be telling my daughters that if they have to get pat down that they have the RIGHT to say "no" and that they should because people shouldn't touch them like that. I will be glad to help prove any TSA agent who thinks my girls are smuggling bombs wrong by helping them. They can implement ways to help check kids where the parents are involved instead of invading the private space of minors. I don't know ANY parent would be say "nah, I'm not helping you check my child so you don't have to grope them".

    The TSA needs to get it together. Now.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Uncle Fester, 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:12pm

    All well and good, but...

    Wayfairer: "I am *personally* willing to go through a scanner, period, if it means it will eliminate the chance of someone sneaking a bomb aboard a plane."

    I'm in total agreement with your statement. The problem is that scanners don't eliminate the chance of someone sneaking a bomb aboard the plane. This merely forces a change in tactics on those planning to do violence, and the whole thing continues to escalate from there.

    Behavioral profiling, folks, that's where we need to go.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Concerned, 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:14pm

    I knew it!

    All the upper brass in the TSA are pedi's, and sick, twisted under-sexed perverts.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:37pm

    What kills me are the comments by some that say "This is just one small step past what we had."

    How does anyone dare belittle how big of a deal this is to people?

    We all have different personal boundaries, but I think refusing to let a government stranger feel or see our genetalia is well within the bounds of reason.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    jshark, 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:45pm

    Gotta agree with others

    wow. This is just... wow. No, it's much more than wow. It's like, "holy freakin' crap batman" wow.

    Even with the level of patent absurdity that the TSA has been ramping up to over the last 9 years, this is such that it escalates from mere "you can't be serious" to a full-blown "OMGWTFBBQ!!! ARE YOU F*$%#@G SERIOUS?" level of cluelessness.

    The whole agency, but James Marchand in particular, first, and foremost, needs to be taken out and fired, jailed, pilloried, hung up by their shorthairs, and then subjected to a little down-home TSA extra special lovin' then next time they try to do some common everyday activity.

    "Excuse me, Mr. Marchand. But before we let you leave the store with that 6-pack and pack of condoms we have to make sure you don't have any car keys or illegal lubricants in your posession. Just bend over this counter so we can check all our favorite hiding places [SNAP!]"

    wow.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Wayfinder (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:45pm

    Jeffrey: "
    I will teach my children that if they do not want to be touched or to be seen naked by ANYONE, doctor, security agent, police, babysitter, etc to say NO. Period. Anything after that is assault."

    I could not agree more.

    Anonymous Coward: "The scans aren't harmless, Mr. Apologist."... "And get fired. Great solution there, Mr. Fascist."

    In my experience Anonymous, when any user has to resort to labeling and calling names... it's because his viewpoint doesn't stand on its own merit. People are entitled to opinions different than yours. That's what freedom of speech is all about. It entitles you to speak your mind; it does not entitle you to harass others. Seriously guy, a little more maturity here. You can surely state your opinion without insulting others for stating theirs.


    Uncle Fester: "I'm in total agreement with your statement. The problem is that scanners don't eliminate the chance of someone sneaking a bomb aboard the plane. This merely forces a change in tactics on those planning to do violence, and the whole thing continues to escalate from there."

    Yeah Fester, that's the primary issue in all of this. Where does "reasonable security" turn into terrorism all of its own? At what point does our need for security violate our rights as individuals and citizens of a supposedly "free" country? When does reasonable become unreasonable?

    Or more accurately and importantly in this case... when does security cross the line and itself become unacceptably abusive? It seems to me that a lot of these things being implemented go way beyond the need for "security" and into areas of gross propagandistic paranoia. We've seen such activities in past history... when a government went from being open and "free" to an abusive police state.

    When people can legally-- by grant of the government-- fondle children and call it a "game"... or even do so without calling it a game... it is obvious this method of "security" is anything but.

    I am sure that security official, in making his "game" statement, did not intend it to come across as it did. I am also fairly sure he needs to be transferred to a less potentially harmful position for being that totally clueless.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Not an electronic Rodent, 3 Dec 2010 @ 8:13pm

      Re:

      Where does "reasonable security" turn into terrorism all of its own? At what point does our need for security violate our rights as individuals and citizens of a supposedly "free" country? When does reasonable become unreasonable?
      That is indeed the debate and it is debatable but I'd assert just not in this case. The "debating point" IMO is way nearer to "pretty much pointless but only inconvenient" than "just as pointless but massively invasive with unknown and untested health risks"....
      perhaps somewhere around "wildly inconvenient but actually potentially fairly useful" might be the point to start debating.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    jshark, 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:46pm

    Gotta agree with others

    wow. This is just... wow. No, it's much more than wow. It's like, "holy freakin' crap batman" wow.

    Even with the level of patent absurdity that the TSA has been ramping up to over the last 9 years, this is such that it escalates from mere "you can't be serious" to a full-blown "OMGWTFBBQ!!! ARE YOU F*$%#@G SERIOUS?" level of cluelessness.

    The whole agency, but James Marchand in particular, first, and foremost, needs to be taken out and fired, jailed, pilloried, hung up by their shorthairs, and then subjected to a little down-home TSA extra special lovin' then next time they try to do some common everyday activity.

    "Excuse me, Mr. Marchand. But before we let you leave the store with that 6-pack and pack of condoms we have to make sure you don't have any car keys or illegal lubricants in your posession. Just bend over this counter so we can check all our favorite hiding places [SNAP!]"

    wow.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Wayfinder (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:46pm

    Jeffrey: "
    I will teach my children that if they do not want to be touched or to be seen naked by ANYONE, doctor, security agent, police, babysitter, etc to say NO. Period. Anything after that is assault."

    I could not agree more.

    Anonymous Coward: "The scans aren't harmless, Mr. Apologist."... "And get fired. Great solution there, Mr. Fascist."

    In my experience Anonymous, when any user has to resort to labeling and calling names... it's because his viewpoint doesn't stand on its own merit. People are entitled to opinions different than yours. That's what freedom of speech is all about. It entitles you to speak your mind; it does not entitle you to harass others. Seriously guy, a little more maturity here. You can surely state your opinion without insulting others for stating theirs.


    Uncle Fester: "I'm in total agreement with your statement. The problem is that scanners don't eliminate the chance of someone sneaking a bomb aboard the plane. This merely forces a change in tactics on those planning to do violence, and the whole thing continues to escalate from there."

    Yeah Fester, that's the primary issue in all of this. Where does "reasonable security" turn into terrorism all of its own? At what point does our need for security violate our rights as individuals and citizens of a supposedly "free" country? When does reasonable become unreasonable?

    Or more accurately and importantly in this case... when does security cross the line and itself become unacceptably abusive? It seems to me that a lot of these things being implemented go way beyond the need for "security" and into areas of gross propagandistic paranoia. We've seen such activities in past history... when a government went from being open and "free" to an abusive police state.

    When people can legally-- by grant of the government-- fondle children and call it a "game"... or even do so without calling it a game... it is obvious this method of "security" is anything but.

    I am sure that security official, in making his "game" statement, did not intend it to come across as it did. I am also fairly sure he needs to be transferred to a less potentially harmful position for being that totally clueless.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 2:53pm

      Re:

      In my experience Anonymous, when any user has to resort to labeling and calling names...

      In my experience, apologists and fascists don't like to be identified as such.

      it's because his viewpoint doesn't stand on its own merit.

      It's my viewpoint that some people are apologists and fascists. Tough luck if you don't like that.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Lakestalker (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 12:47pm

    If enough of us refuse to fly and refuse to comply, the airlines will storm the government and the government will have to back down. There are NO experts in the TSA, only domestic terrorists... PERIOD. Touch my child and die, easy rule. My job as a father is to protect my family. I would NEVER subject them to the groping I see on the news. If we couldn't drive there, it isn't necessary to go. STOP FLYING! It wouldn't take long if everyone said no. I would rather risk a bomb than lose an ounce of my civil liberties.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Kirt, 3 Dec 2010 @ 1:07pm

    TSA and Children

    And, of course, there's this response to the TSA's policies:

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20024067-1.html

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 1:09pm

    Won't somebody think of the children!?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    TDR, 3 Dec 2010 @ 1:50pm

    Not to go off subject - I hate the TSA as much as most people here and think they're quite totally and completely useless - but I've continually seen references to the story about flight 93's passengers fighting back, but it's my understanding that Cheney had the plane shot down and that's why it did go down, not because of any passenger revolt.

    The passenger story was just a feel-good "patriotic" cover story Bush used when DHS was first made shortly thereafter. I could be wrong, but I think that's what really happened. I know about the alleged cell phone call, but how do we know it's authentic? And that hideous two-word phrase has kept popping up in movies and such everywhere ever since, it annoys the hell out of me every time I hear it - it's pure PR, nothing more.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Michael Pelletier, 5 Dec 2010 @ 10:33am

      Flight 93 Conspiracy Theory

      Two conspiracy theorists died and went to heaven. After a couple of weeks, who should they happen to meet but God himself!

      One of the conspiracy theorists screws up his courage and asks "So God, who really killed JFK?"

      God replies, "Well, I know this will disappoint you, but Lee Harvey Oswald acting alone shot Kennedy, and Jack Ruby acting alone shot Oswald."

      The one conspiracy theorist then turns to the other and says, "Wow! This conspiracy is deeper than we ever imagined!"

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Steve, 3 Dec 2010 @ 1:51pm

    How do you beat the game?

    If it is a game, is the objective to pass contraband through security without getting caught? Is it you versus security?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Michael (profile), 3 Dec 2010 @ 2:22pm

    "Make It Easier?"

    Easier for who: the child or the paid child molester?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Tim, 3 Dec 2010 @ 2:56pm

    Wakeup People

    The matrix has you.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Prcanmita, 3 Dec 2010 @ 2:57pm

    How dumb are these people?

    I too have put my family on a personal NO flying list. There is NO FRIGGIN way these idiots are viewing or touching my daughter because I would be in Prison. I am a Mother first & foremost so if we are going on vacation we are driving.

    May the good Lord protect those children who are subjected to this.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Emily, 3 Dec 2010 @ 3:30pm

    TSA Pat Downs

    I can tell you one thing this has just made me sick! My husband and I have adopted 2 little girls that were both sexually abused playing their "fathers" game. I can tell you this . . . if someone tried to pat down my girls especially some pathetic uneducated rent a cop TSA agent I would be in jail because i would just simply kick the s*it out of them. How dare our goverment let something like this happen. Pathetic!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2010 @ 4:37pm

      Re: TSA Pat Downs

      I can tell you this . . . if someone tried to pat down my girls especially some pathetic uneducated rent a cop TSA agent I would be in jail because i would just simply kick the s*it out of them. How dare our goverment let something like this happen. Pathetic!

      It's easy to talk big, but in reality you would probably just put you head down, look the other way, and hope that your display of submission would save you from being next.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Transbot9, 4 Dec 2010 @ 11:17am

        Re: Re: TSA Pat Downs

        That's sick. Plus, it is obvious you've never had to deal with protective parents.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Dec 2010 @ 2:44pm

        Re: Re: TSA Pat Downs

        I'm wondering if the government will pay extra if some TSA agent is murdered because of those pat downs.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Nastybutler77 (profile), 6 Dec 2010 @ 12:13pm

        Re: Re: TSA Pat Downs

        It's easy to talk big, but in reality you would probably just put you head down, look the other way, and hope that your display of submission would save you from being next.

        Just like it's easy for an Anonymous Coward like you to hide behind your keyboard and be a dick to a lady who's raising two survivors of sexual abuse. Way to go.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Rhonda Koechig, 4 Dec 2010 @ 2:55am

    TSA groping "game"

    our children are being indoctrinated into relinquinshing all their rights and liberties.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Ali Al-Hajamy, 4 Dec 2010 @ 7:00am

    This is vile and disgusting

    Hey kids! Let's play a game! All ya've gotta do is stand still here while the nice man puts his hands all over your body! Whaddaya say? Wanna play a little game?
    Jesus Fucking Christ, I know of people who have been sexually abused, and their abusers used that exact tactic to get them to submit to their urges. This is, quite simply, an abomination.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    JMThane, 4 Dec 2010 @ 8:36am

    Total Security Fail Administration

    Wayfinder: The proper Benjamin Franklin quote has already been provided in the comments, so I'll just point you to it. You are quite correct - the TSA have become the terrorists. And we *do* know who is making the money off the backscatter scanner deal - for your reading pleasure, start here: http://washingtonexaminer.com/nation/2010/11/naked-scanners-lobbyists-join-war-terror .

    btr1701: You wrote:
    >The Supreme Court had nothing to do with this policy. It was conceived and implemented by a liberal Democrat administration and Congress.

    Wrong. Department of Homeland Security and the TSA were conceived and implemented by the Bush II regime, shortly after 9/11. An all-GOP-led regime. The current administration and Congress have very little [read: no] control over Homeland Security and TSA.

    Current transportation security is reactionary to what has been tried before, and does nothing to actually stop the next attack. I suggest reading Bruce Schneier's blogs at http://www.schneier.com/ .

    The only truly effective things the air transportation industry or Department of Homeland Security has done to prevent further terrorist attacks is to reinforce the doors to the cockpit, and for the passengers to learn to subdue the terrorists.

    And TDR:
    >I've continually seen references to the story about flight 93's passengers fighting back, but it's my understanding that Cheney had the plane shot down and that's why it did go down, not because of any passenger revolt.

    Your understanding is incorrect. Fighter planes were on their way, but they didn't get there. Had the military shot down Flight 93, it would have been trumpeted in *all* the media, and most especially, Fox News, as a "See? Bush is *not* a failure!" piece.

    I watched airport security evolve in the six weekends after 9/11. It was bordering on the overcautious even then. Please - take a nail clipper file away because it might be used as a weapon? I can do far more damage with an ink pen. Or my bare hands. Or my cane, which I need to use to walk with as I have arthritis. And that was *before* the TSA got organized. We are so close to being a totalitarian rule country right now that it scares me.

    One last story, which relates to that last statement: I know an elderly gentleman who, about three years after 9/11, told a small group of us gathered at his home for Thanksgiving (something he and his wife do every year - Thanksgiving for those that have nowhere else to go) that he saw what happened in Germany in the early to mid 1930s. He lived there, with his parents. He is a Jew, of German origin. He hid in his family's home during Kristallnacht - yes, while it was happening and in the city in which it was happening - and he saw the aftermath of Kristallnacht the morning after. Shortly thereafter, his family fled Germany to come to the US, because they saw what was happening to Germany and didn't want to be there for any more of it.

    This elderly gentleman then told us that what he saw in the 1930s he was seeing again in the aftermath of 9/11. And he was terrified, because it seemed to him that no one else (or at best, a very few people) saw it happening. And part of his fear came from the fact that he's too old to flee again.

    I didn't need his account to see it happening. But it scared me to have this survivor tell his story, and then to say that it's happening again.

    We the people need to nip this in the bud now, even though it's blossomed into a rather large flower. The government doesn't care about Joe Sixpack any more, no matter the political persuasion of Joe Sixpack. They're in it for the power, they're in it for the money. Those are not the principles upon which this country was founded.

    We still have our Second Amendment rights. Perhaps it's time to use those rights - before those, too, get taken away from us.

    (Factual accounts nullify Godwin, so don't even think of using that "Law" on this comment.)

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Transbot9, 4 Dec 2010 @ 11:23am

      Re: Total Security Fail Administration

      If the Obama administration wanted to, they could put a stop to it - but they don't. Congress does have legislative powers that could be used to reign it it, but they don't.

      It's not that they can't do it, it is that they won't do it - and they seem to be only interested in making it worse.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        JMThane (profile), 5 Dec 2010 @ 9:11am

        Re: Re: Total Security Fail Administration

        You're right about that - they won't do anything because they think TSA has it under control. That's why I said "very little [read: no] control". Why should the government control it when they don't think there's anything wrong with it?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 4 Dec 2010 @ 10:19pm

      Re: Total Security Fail Administration

      We the people need to nip this in the bud now,

      The problem is, all "the people" care about is having a party to go this weekend. They have abandoned all principles.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Jessica, 4 Dec 2010 @ 9:57am

    wtf

    we are supposed to fight against sexual preditors, doing this makes it so that kids will think its ok to be touched like that.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Jess89, 4 Dec 2010 @ 1:14pm

    This is rediculous, it is NOT ok to allow children to believe that grouping is a game. I think also that this could cause problems for children who may be potentialy abused in their lives. If the people at the airports and the parents allow it to happen then if this wierd person says they want to play the same game then what to stop kids from believe that is ok as well..... like i read on anothers post it may be better to teach your children to say no and then if they try anything its considers assoult. The prosidures to fly are becoming rediculous and not worth flying anymore.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Pedobear, 4 Dec 2010 @ 7:29pm

    Approves of this.

    ………………….._,,-~’’’―――’’~-,,
    ………………..,-‘’ ; ; ;_,,---,,_ ; ;’’-,…………………………….._,,,---,,_
    ……………….,’ ; ; ;,-‘ , , , , , ‘-, ; ;’-,,,,---~~’’’’’’~--,,,_…..,,-~’’ ; ; ; ;__;’-,
    ……………….| ; ; ;,’ , , , _,,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ―’’~’-,,_ ,,-~’’ , , ‘, ;’,
    ……………….’, ; ; ‘-, ,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-, , , , , ,’ ; |
    …………………’, ; ;,’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-, , ,-‘ ;,-‘
    ………………….,’-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-‘ ;,,-‘
    ………………..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;__ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,’
    ………………,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘’―: : ’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; _ ; ; ; ; ;’,
    ……………..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;| : : : : : :| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘’―: ―’’-, ; ; ;’,
    …………….,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,_: : _,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; | : : : : : :| ; ; ; |
    ……………,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ―― ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-,,_ : :,-‘ ; ; ; ;|
    …………..,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,,-~’’ , , , , ,,,-~~-, , , , _ ; ; ;―― ; ; ; ; ;|
    ..…………,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’ , , , , , , ,( : : : : :) , , , ,’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|
    ……….,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’, , , , , , , , ,’~---~’’ , , , , , ,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,
    …….,-‘’ ; _, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘’~-,,,,--~~’’’―’’’~-,,_ , ,_,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,
    ….,-‘’-~’’,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; | ; ; | . . . . . . ,’; ,’’― ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,_ ; ‘-,
    ……….,’ ; ;,-, ; ;, ; ; ;, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘, ; ;’, . . . . .,’ ;,’ ; ; ; ;, ; ; ;,’-, ; ;,’ ‘’~--‘’’
    ………,’-~’ ,-‘-~’’ ‘, ,-‘ ‘, ,,- ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘, ; ; ‘~-,,,-‘’ ; ,’ ; ; ; ; ‘, ;,-‘’ ; ‘, ,-‘,
    ……….,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ‘’ ; ; ;’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘’-,,_ ; ; ; _,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ;’-‘’ ; ; ; ‘’ ; ;’-,
    ……..,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;――’’― ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-,
    ……,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; |, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,
    …..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|..’-,_ ; ; ; , ; ; ; ; ; ‘,
    ….,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; | ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…….’’’,-~’ ; ; ; ; ; ,’
    …,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’~-,,,,,--~~’’’’’’~-,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…..,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-
    …| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘
    …’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,’….’, ; ; ; ; _,,-‘’
    ….’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…….’’~~’’―
    …..’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;_,,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘
    ………’’~-,,_ ; ; ; ; _,,,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘
    ………..| ; ; ;――’’’’― ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,,-‘
    ………..’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘
    …………| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|
    …………’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ~-,,___ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,
    ………….’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘….’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,
    ………..,’ ‘- ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘’……….’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,
    ……….,’ ; ;’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ,,-‘…………….’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,
    ………,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘’…………………’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; |
    ……..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,,-‘………………………’’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; |
    ……..| ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…………………………,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’
    ……..| ; ; ; ; ; ; ,’………………………..,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,’’
    ……..| ; ; ; ; ; ;,’……………………….,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘
    ……..’,_ , ; , ;,’……………………….,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘
    ………’,,’,―,’,’’|……………………….| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘--,,
    ………….―…’’………………………..’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’~,,
    ……………………………………………’’-,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’~-,,
    ………………………………………………..’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ,,_ ; ;’-,’’-,
    …………………………………………………..’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,__,\\--\\.
    ……………………………………………………’-, ; ; ;,,-~’’’ \\ , ,|, |
    ………………………………………………………’’~-‘’_ , , ,,’,_/--‘

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Dunlop, 5 Dec 2010 @ 12:44am

    i am so enjoying this three stooges expansion of federal authority

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    jwpegler, 5 Dec 2010 @ 7:39am

    child molesters at the TSA

    Professions that enable people to be in a position where child abuse could more easily occur often attract people who want to abuse children - teachers, daycare workers, priests, and now TSA agents.

    Whoever came up with this idea should fired, because he's probably a child molester himself.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    xenomancer (profile), 5 Dec 2010 @ 5:50pm

    Wishful Thinking

    Maybe its a pedophile sting operation. Hell, if the government is good enough to plot a false flag terrorist strike this ought to be real good:

    A trained army of hypercaffeinated toddlers on sugar highs and their righteously pissed off parents kicking the shit out of several thousand hired child gropers on the same day. Taking the doors at kennedy will be remembered as P-day. Just watch out for the traffic cones; they might keep the cata-, er, minivans from landing on the weathered mats.

    In all seriousness, the TSA can't be disbanded like the den of criminals they are too soon. And if, somehow, they happen to miss a child being used to deliver a bomb to a plane and the passengers happen to subdue the rugrat, I'll bet all of Obama's change that they immediately claim that if they had only had the purview to search inside of children they could have made their first catch.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Wayfinder (profile), 9 Dec 2010 @ 2:14pm

    Anonymous, seems to me you do more name-calling and ranting than actually making a point. Stopped taking the meds, did ya? ; )

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    TDR, 13 Dec 2010 @ 10:23am

    What the Civil War really did was quash any idea the states had that they still had any rights. What needs to happen now is for the states to remember that they still do have those rights, and use them. Such as the right of secession, if that's what it takes to cut the central government back down to the small size it was originally intended to be.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    maslior, 24 Dec 2010 @ 12:36am

    Thanks for groping

    Groping kids is TSA's fav part time job.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    keepingtheusasafe (profile), 14 Jan 2011 @ 4:45pm

    I use to be a tsa agent and they do not say that. Also it's not groping it's called a pat down..get it right!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Feb 2011 @ 9:00am

    The TSA has not caught ONE SINGLE terrorist in it's existence.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Robert, 10 Sep 2012 @ 5:14pm

    pat downs

    I have worked at TSA checkpoint for almost 2 and 1/2 years and have never patted down a child. It used to be we did everything we could to not pat them and if we did, it was a milder pat down than an adult with the parent there of course. Now they changed it so a child never gets one except by permission of some big director somewhere.

    A lot of what you hear about TSA, even on the news is made up. I heard a story where they took a lady with a medical device or feeding tube and strip searched her and wouldn't let anyone else witness it. That is ridiculous. We never ask anyone to remove clothing except for jackets and belts and shoes. And we always offer to have a witness with us.

    If they have some strange medical device we might pat it outside the clothes, then have them pat it and test their hands for explosives residue.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.