"Do we really have any reason to believe that a elderly woman in a
wheelchair who only occasionally remembers who her son is, and is
generally mostly incoherent, is going to detonate an explosive
device on a plane?"

I hate to defend the TSA. Suppose we agree that this woman presents
no danger, and therefore the TSA doesn't need to check her. If the
bad guys could count on this, then she becomes an excellent place to
secrete explosives. She could then unknowingly provide the
explosives for a suicide bomber who was carrying the detonation
mechanism.

http://www.columbian.com/news/2011/sep/12/rough-treatment-by-tsa-inexcusable/

I just read this and it seems to fit your request.

LauraGr's post reminded me again how thankful I am that my fractured into 4 pieces shoulder did not need a metal replacement because there I times I simply have to fly.

Ron, I agree. Not only are we suffering a wheelchair gap with the terrorists, but currently we are sorely lacking in actual aircraft inspection, leaving thousands of places for a terrorist to plant a bomb on each and every flight.

We must begin routine teardown of every part of the aircraft prior to every flight.

Sure, it might take days to reassemble the engines and aircraft for every flight, but America must remain vigilant against attack at all times.

Waiting for days and spending a thousand dollars to fly across your state would be a small price to pay for more security.

Do we really have any reason to believe that a elderly woman in a wheelchair who only occasionally remembers who her son is, and is generally mostly incoherent, is going to detonate an explosive device on a plane?

That's not the point, and I _really hate_ to defend the damn near indefensible TSA, but yes, she's a threat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindawi_affair

The TSA does a horrible job of what they do, and they're stupid, vindictive, and petty. They miss the first priority of screening.

But the entire point of a screening process is that no-one is [potentially] excepted. Everyone is possibly "bad" - even a dupe. That includes "nuns", "incontinent elderly", and anybody else who's "unlikely" to be a "terrorist".

Where the TSA fails is failing to put any intelligence at all into it. Since they can't search everyone, they search "randomly", or as Amy has discovered, those who piss them off.

When we visited England in 1989, my Grandmother was frisked coming out of Gatwick, as we were heading to baggage, there was a "chokepoint", and some guards with clickers, and every so many men, and women, got frisked - it was over before my Grandmother even realized what was happening. That's "random" - every 50th, or 100th. No matter their age, their appearance. Just the outward apperance of their sex.

But as we've seen, the TSA is horribly afraid of being accused of being racist/anti-islamist, such that in fact that is a defacto protection against those searches.

80% of the effort *should* be put into the "most obvious" areas, and the other 20% is the random, "just in case we didn't think of this".

But that means that yes, everyone _has_ to be degraded, or the security theater is even more of a sham.

(Personally, I'm good with stopping the whole sham, but realize I'm in the minority - for now.)

currently we are sorely lacking in actual aircraft inspection, leaving thousands of places for a terrorist to plant a bomb on each and every flight.

Which is what really burns me up about the September 11th hijackings, the "security" and the response to it.

.... The Hijackers had *maintenance badges*. They had access to the planes during the night. Not a damn bit of good will it do to screen passengers if boxcutters/guns/fake/real bombs are left on the planes by those "authorized" to be there.

And no, that security hasn't been stepped up (effectively) in response.

http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg39191.html

Ron is right. If you decide that cute pregnant blondes could not be carrying a bomb, then bombs will find their way into the backpacks thereof.

Don't check old ladies? Actually, old ladies would make great bombers, as they are going to die soon anyway.

When I am 87 and crapping in my pants, I hope to wire up with a nuke and parachute right into Mecca. In high season.

Actually, scratch that. I don't want the parachute.

I am actually concerned for my safely if I had to go through their new scanners because I have two metal plates in my left arm and a handful of pins.

I had my car armor-plated, and installed thick bullet-proof windows, so terrorists will never get me on my commutes in Indianapolis.

I'm going to repeat this until all the idiots who support the TSA get it.

The TSA was not needed less than 70 minutes after the crash into the Tower 2.

If the government had come down with the simple mandate -- the airlines need to provide more security for their aircraft and passengers -- and not mandated the TSA -- the airlines would have done it. It could be anything from issuing Tazers to every passenger to everyone has to travel in throwaway paper garments to submitting to a background check. The airlines can no more afford to lose multimillion dollar aircraft than passengers can afford to lose their lives.

If you want to give up your Fourth Amendment rights to travel across the country, that is your choice. Demanding that everyone else give away those rights to a quasi-government agency that is not a law enforcement -- You can go to hell! Do not pass Go! Do not collect $200!

9:02:59: Flight 175 crashes at about 590 mph (950 km/h) into the south face of the South Tower (2 WTC) of the World Trade Center, banked between floors 77 and 85.[11] By this time, several media organizations, including the three major broadcast networks (who have interrupted their morning shows), are covering the first plane crash—millions see the impact live. Parts of the plane leave the building from its east and north sides, falling to the ground six blocks away.

9:57: Passenger revolt begins on Flight 93.

10:03:11: United Airlines Flight 93 is crashed by its hijackers and passengers, due to fighting in the cockpit 80 miles (129 km) southeast of Pittsburgh in Somerset County, Pennsylvania.[20] Later reports indicate that passengers had learned about the World Trade Center and Pentagon crashes on cell phones and at least three were planning on resisting the hijackers; the resistance was confirmed by Flight 93's cockpit voice recording, on which the hijackers are heard making their decision to down the plane before the passengers succeed in breaching the cockpit door. The 9/11 Commission believed that Flight 93's target was either the United States Capitol building or the White House in Washington, D.C.[21]

The above quote en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_for_the_day_of_the_September_11_attacks

Oh, a small P.S. the shoe bomber and the panty bomber didn't go through the TSA. Take a guess who stopped them?

The other unarmed passengers.

Meanwhile the TSA was responsible for allowing a passenger to board a plane with a college ID and a bogus boarding pass.

newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/06/30/authorities-investigate-security-breach-at-jfk-
airport-after-man-flies-to-los-angeles-without-ticket

So I don't have to repeat the rest of the arguments that I have that follow on these comments look at the prior days comments. Please come back with something actually original.

www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/09/08/clueless_blog_c.html

This story sums up what TSA means to me: idiots who cannot read, have no idea what respect means and who are not working at all to reduce risks. From the article:

"On 11 January 2002, Medal of Honor Joseph J. Foss of Scottsdale, Arizona — a major in the USMC during World War II, a colonel in the USAF during the Korean War, and later a brigadier general with the South Dakota Air National Guard — was attempting to board an America West flight bound for Arlington, Virginia, when airport security held him for 45 minutes while they debated what to do with a variety of suspect items he had about his person. This 86-year-old former governor of South Dakota was on his way to attend a National Rifle Association meeting and to speak to cadets at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, and he carried with him his Medal of Honor, as well as a Medal of Honor commemorative nail file and a dummy bullet which had been made into a key fob.

Each of these items was regarded as a potential security risk by airport personnel: the bullet for being a bullet, the nail file for being a nail file (metal nail files are now banned on flights in the USA), and the Medal of Honor for being a suspicious five-pointed metal object that might have been a weapon (similar to the Japanese throwing discs known hira shuriken)."

They strip-searched a real WW2 hero three times.

I guess even WW2 heros should know you can't bring a nail file onto a plane.

After your manicure, you "could" threaten to poke someone in the eye and commandeer the plane with the damn thing.

Stupid ass rules...

Meanwhile in CT, TSA "officers" are busted as part of a drug ring. I feel safer already.

http://www.statesmanjournal.com/article/20110913/UPDATE/110913011/1001

As MarkD mentioned at 9:11 am...

Hi Amy, I just saw you on Alex Jone's Nightly News on Youtube. I am just outraged at what the TSA is doing, it's almost as if they are told to be humiliating. I hope that you are able to file a suit against them like Jesse Ventura is doing. No matter what one thinks about the cause of 9/11, these tactics are not making us safer, if anything it is more dangerous to us to get irradiated every time we fly and felt up with gloves that are not changed and having to walk in stocking feet catching who knows what. More power to you, keep up the good fight!

Some bad words but it seems to fit.....The future of TSA searches...

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2366#comic