Rich People Who Fly Frequently Won't Get Felt Up By The TSA!
My boyfriend Gregg, who unfortunately isn't one of the "1%", but who flies to Detroit every few weeks for his work, often gets upgraded to Business Class.
The last two times he's flown out of Detroit (he came home today), he's been able to leave his shoes on, his belt on, his laptop in the bag, and just put his phone in his laptop bag (instead of having it in his pocket).
He said they told him something like, "If you don't set off the metal detector, you just speed off to your plane." No nudie-scan. No ball-grab.
And no, this is not a good thing. I believe this measure is designed to stop the most influential voices from complaining about the TSA. (Nothing like a little sense of "I'm special" -- relative privilege -- to make a person forget the Fourth Amendment violation.)
Here's the back and front view of the little bookmarkie thing the TSA guy handed Gregg last time he traveled, describing the Very Special People Who Don't Get Their HooHoos Grabbed TSA pre-screening program that they're testing in Detroit and Atlanta:
So, we'll have 'pre-screening' if you pay for it?
Of course, the 'terrorists' won't notice this and be among the first to sign up.
More brilliance from Fatherland Security.
DrCos at November 14, 2011 3:35 AM
All animals are equal. Some are more equal than others.
Steve at November 14, 2011 4:01 AM
You can also pay for a pass to put on your car that lets you zip right through the Canadian border. This is especially beneficial at the Blaine, WA border crossing, as there is an area of WA called Point Roberts that you can only get to by leaving the States, driving up into Canada, and then crossing the border again.
I don't think this has anything to do with "rich", just that you've proven yourself.
deathbysnoosnoo at November 14, 2011 6:29 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/11/14/rich_people_who.html#comment-2762201">comment from deathbysnoosnooI don't think this has anything to do with "rich", just that you've proven yourself.
We're talking (vis a vis the TSA) about travel by people who are not suspected of crimes within our border. There should be no searches -- none whatsoever. And no sucking of data about people to get out of such searches.
Amy Alkon at November 14, 2011 6:39 AM
On one hand, this makes sense: the guy who flies twice a week isn't likely to blow the plane up, so is it really necessary to put him through security every time?
On the other hand, seems like a really easy loophole for a potential terrorist to figure out: just establish trust for a couple years and then you're good to go with a bomb in your underwear or whatever the latest trend is.
And if we're going to profile people based on, "this rich businessman isn't likely to blow up a plane," why not go the whole way and use racial profiling? I'd be much more wary of the wealthy, well-traveled Muslim businessman in first class than the grandmas and toddlers that the TSA seems to love feeling up. If it's really that important to subject everyone to these measures, then we should be subjecting everyone to these measures--not just those that can't afford an exemption.
Shannon at November 14, 2011 6:56 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/11/14/rich_people_who.html#comment-2762253">comment from ShannonMOST Americans aren't likely to blow up a plane, which is why it makes no sense at all to go through the needle-in-a-haystack exercise of searching everyone who gets on a plane. What makes sense is targeted intelligence by highly trained intelligence officers against people evidence shows are likely to be terrorists.
Amy Alkon at November 14, 2011 7:07 AM
It's easier and cheaper to hire extremely ignorant people to be security guards. Boy do they hire some Tards too.
fitley at November 14, 2011 7:41 AM
Or get the rich Muslim businessman to carry your weapons across and hand over to take out a different flight.
Just because it is the religous duty to wage war on the infidels those same infidels should completely trust those Muslims who haven't, yet, been caught with weapons in hand actively waging jihad.
jhn1 at November 14, 2011 7:45 AM
Highly trained intel officers? No need. 99.99% of all terrorists are currently coming from one known group.
Diggs at November 14, 2011 7:50 AM
The technical term for this "little bookmarkie thing" is "a bookmark".
Harry at November 14, 2011 7:53 AM
I agree with the remark that this isn't a program for the "rich" but a program for "trusted" (and frequent) flyers.
My wife flys between 250-350k miles a year on Delta and received the initial solicitation about taking part in the program. As she doesn't depart through either airport she decided not to sign up.
That said she is enrolled in the US Customs Global Entry program. For participation you have to do a personal interview and submit all of your international travel from the last 5 years as part of the screening process.
US Customs is partnering with the TSA on their this new "TSA PRE" program. Interestingly when you visit their website it says: "At no point, however, is this program an entitlement. Passengers are always subject to random, unpredictable screening measures."
http://www.globalentry.gov/tsa.html
I think there is some common sense to the decision. Someone who flys more than 75k, 125k or more on an airline understands the nature of security screening and doesn't fly like elderly grandparents who travel on planes once a year or less. (Think of George Clooney's character in "Up in the Air".) The Flyertalk forum has some great discussions about this.
To be clear participants in this TSA PRE might get special privilages in two airports but their special status doesn't mean they won't get frisked, felt up, scanned or any of the other procedures if they catch someone's attention. They also have to take off the belt, shoes, etc. at all the other airports in the country.
Jim at November 14, 2011 7:58 AM
Amy, I have to agree with the third commenter. In fact, the very first sentence of your column indicates that Gregg "isn't one of the 1%" but flies frequently.
I'm just as fed up with TSA's BS as you are, and I think it's stupid to waste resources on an invasive search of every single passenger. But I don't see any basis for claiming that it's indexed to the passenger's wealth or status.
The silliness of this exercise is that it's just telling the world at large - including the terrorists - "just fly X number of times without blowing up the plane, and you can skip the search."
Asher Abrams at November 14, 2011 8:06 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/11/14/rich_people_who.html#comment-2762370">comment from Asher AbramsCome on, let's be real here: Frequent flyers -- people who fly often enough to get upgraded to business class or to be able to afford it -- are typically people who have money or corporate power behind them. Not your usual poor schlub who looks on CheapTickets.com to juggle the day he goes to save $40.
I would fly to New York and Paris all the time if I had the money. It would have helped my book sales if I could have been in NYC to do TV.
Amy Alkon at November 14, 2011 8:23 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/11/14/rich_people_who.html#comment-2762396">comment from HarryThe technical term for this "little bookmarkie thing" is "a bookmark".
Bookmarks are used to mark one's place in books. This is a bookmark-shaped thing designed to present propaganda to the public.
Amy Alkon at November 14, 2011 8:38 AM
It's been obvious for some time that the real customers of airlines are business travelers. The rest of us are allowed to purchase tickets in cattle-car class, but we aren't the ones who pay for the flight--and damn if they don't make that clear.
DensityDuck at November 14, 2011 8:54 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/11/14/rich_people_who.html#comment-2762428">comment from DensityDuckExactly. Pissed off biz travelers -- with money and influence -- are a problem. Pissed off the rest of us...well, deal.
Amy Alkon at November 14, 2011 9:05 AM
Having the ID card of the biz traveller doesn't prove that YOU are actually that traveller.
How hard will it be to forge the ID card of the "frequently flying businessman"? Or steal it?
Do the TSA really check the identity and genuineness of the card? Or will they be just happy to see it for a cursory glance?
Marian Kechlibar at November 14, 2011 9:48 AM
I wouldn't mind having a card to carry on my person *and* one to put on my car that indicates that I'm an American Citizen (or here legally) that I don't have a record, and that I'm a safe driver. That way the powers that be can concentrate their efforts elsewhere.
My records are already out there, for pete's sake, let's frikkin aggregate them so I can get something positive from them.
I'm really tired of proving myself over and over--teachers, bosses, potential bosses...I just want the benefit of the doubt. Permanently.
Also, I'd like a trophy of some sort please. ;)
deathbysnoosnoo at November 14, 2011 10:06 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/11/14/rich_people_who.html#comment-2762704">comment from Marian KechlibarHaving the ID card of the biz traveller doesn't prove that YOU are actually that traveller. How hard will it be to forge the ID card of the "frequently flying businessman"?
Good point, Marian.
Amy Alkon at November 14, 2011 10:30 AM
The TSA is to protecting America as Jerry Sandusky is to protecting young boys.
By the way, you can buy his book on Amazon:
""Touched -- The Jerry Sandusky Story."
And no, I'm not kidding about the title.
http://www.amazon.com/mn/search/?ref%5F=nb%5Fsb%5Fss%5Fc%5F1%5F16&url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=touched%20the%20jerry%20sandusky%20story&sprefix=touched%20the%20jerr&rd=1
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at November 14, 2011 10:59 AM
I used to wear a uniform on air travel in CONUS. I set off the metal detector anyway and this way the public could see an 06 getting the feelie from our vaunted TSA.
Curtis at November 14, 2011 11:07 AM
I am not a frequent traveler, but have flown several times this year. I have not been scanned, searched, or fondled. But the routine of removing shoes, placing belongings in a bin, laptop in another bin, etc, is definitely a pain. But we all line up like sheep to go through the motions.
For some reason the TSA does not honor or is exempt from the 4th amendment. Why is that?
As far as catching potential or real terrorists their record is poor; Zero for three (or more).
I am definitely in favor of profiling which would eliminate most of the problems with flying these days.
charlie at November 14, 2011 11:15 AM
This is just a dumb little comment, but taking my shoes off to walk through the lane, on that disgustingly dirty floor where a gazillion other nasty, who knows where they've been feet have walked, makes me want to hurl.
Laurie at November 14, 2011 11:32 AM
"I wouldn't mind having a card to carry on my person *and* one to put on my car that indicates that I'm an American Citizen (or here legally) that I don't have a record, and that I'm a safe driver. That way the powers that be can concentrate their efforts elsewhere."
I have one of those, it's called a "Carry Permit". I had to be photographed, fingerprinted, and pass a background check to get it.
Maybe next time I fly I should just show it to them.
Or maybe not...
Rich at November 14, 2011 1:02 PM
Regardless of frequent flyership or affluence, neither is a justification for discrimination. There is no reason anyone should be exempted from the process...if the process were legal...which it is not.
Patrick at November 14, 2011 2:06 PM
>>"It's easier and cheaper to hire extremely ignorant people to be security guards. Boy do they hire some Tards too."
Boy, don't I know it. My idiot brother was a TSA agent for a few months (his record at holding a job has only been 4 months). And this is a pathological liar with a chip on his shoulder and an entitlement complex.
I can't trust any government agency willing to hire a numbnuts like him.
cornerdemon at November 14, 2011 2:21 PM
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others!
Jennifer at November 14, 2011 3:44 PM
The trusted "rich businessman" doesn't have to be the one who blows up the plane. All he has to do is walk the bomb through security and hand it off in the restroom to the thoroughly screened, x-rayed and wazoo-checked terrorist who's going to carry the bomb onto the plane. Hell, the "rich businessman" can fly every weekend for months, just to establish a clear record of being waved through, and can keep flying every weekend after that, just to avoid being suspected.
That's the whole point of random checks, to prevent people from gaming the security system this way. Ideally you search people at random and also secretly profile the shit out of people for the sole purpose of secretly seating air marshals next to the most likely suspects to keep an eye on them. Assuming the suspects behave, they never even know they were monitored.
Unfortunately, the people who dream these things up don't think very much. Fortunately for me I don't fly very much either.
jms at November 14, 2011 4:02 PM
"On the other hand, seems like a really easy loophole for a potential terrorist to figure out: just establish trust for a couple years and then you're good to go with a bomb in your underwear or whatever the latest trend is."
Bingo. The First Offense cannot be stopped this way.
"Someone who flys more than 75k, 125k or more on an airline understands the nature of security screening and doesn't fly like elderly grandparents who travel on planes once a year or less."
No, they do not. They only know what the routine used on them is. "The nature of security screening" is not found at an American airport, because it is predictable and only engages passengers. This is theater, nothing more.
In previous articles I have posted the several things America does NOT do as it accustoms its sheep to being rewarded for being presumed guilty. Just ask yourself: "Why do I think being patted down at an airport stops all terrorism against America?"
Radwaste at November 14, 2011 4:56 PM
BREAKING NEWS: Over 100 homegrown terrorists just signed up for Delta SkyMiles Medallion program.
MikeCornelison.com at November 14, 2011 7:36 PM
I'm going to repeat myself, ad nauseam, until everyone who wants to argue against the facts gets it.
8:46:30: Flight 11 crashes at roughly 466 mph (790 km/h or 219m/s or 425 knots) into the north face of the North Tower (1 WTC)
9:03:02: Flight 175 crashes at about 590 mph (950 km/h) into the south face of the South Tower (2 WTC)
9:37:46: Flight 77 crashes into the western side of the Pentagon
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.
The time between Tower 2 being struck and the crash of Flight 93 was 60 minutes and 9 seconds. I'll give the benefit of the doubt and call it a flat 63 minutes just because we all know how well clocks are set GMT. ;-)
Every subsequent airborne terror attempt, both the shoe bomber and panty bomber, have been stopped by the passengers.
The TSA was not really needed 63 minutes after the attack on Tower 2. Two months later, after the cockpit doors were reinforced, it became completely unnecessary.
As far as the scenario of a trusted passenger smuggling a package through security to pass to an accomplice. The same thing could be done by finding some airport worker who has a wife and kids and a shitload of debt. Tell them to smuggle a package in and get $50K or don't and his family dies.
Another scenario -- bring stuff into the "private" side of the airport and then have it transported to commercial side.
Another scenario -- Years ago I was on a USAF base. On the front side was a nice 12 foot high chain link fence with barbed wire on it. On the back side was a four foot high three wire, barbed, non-electrified fence mounted on wooden posts. It was about two-three miles to the runway and aircraft. There were no ground sensors because rabbits, deer, and other wildlife would trip it. Want to guess how easy it would have been to penetrate the setup at night?
Jim P. at November 14, 2011 7:53 PM
Yes - the cockpit doors, and wrong assumption (did the US and others not encounter the kamikaze?) that crazed psychos would not commit suicide. Never forget.
JamesB_Bkk at November 15, 2011 4:20 AM
My boyfriend Gregg, who unfortunately isn't one of the "1%",
barf
bandit at November 15, 2011 5:19 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/11/14/rich_people_who.html#comment-2765122">comment from banditMy boyfriend Gregg, who unfortunately isn't one of the "1%", barf
Well, it's better to be rich (if I'm going to be miserable, I'd rather be miserable at the Four Seasons) but I wouldn't hurl over the lack of it.
And, um, read the site before you decide you know what that means, and whether it means anything other than the fact that he doesn't happen to have a jet of his own, and thus needs to fly on Delta's with some frequency.
Amy Alkon at November 15, 2011 5:44 AM
Amy, you might find it interesting to listen to this, beginning at 15:30. It's a podcast from St. Louis based media personality, Dana Loesch, describing her recent TSA encounter at Denver Intl. Airport.
Robert W. (Vancouver) at November 15, 2011 9:12 AM
"Every subsequent airborne terror attempt, both the shoe bomber and panty bomber, have been stopped by the passengers."
No, they were stopped by the bomb not going off. In both cases the attacker triggered their weapon.
DensityDuck at December 1, 2011 2:45 PM
Leave a comment