I'm not traveling for the holidays. It's not because of this or anything else in particular... There's just nothing planned.

But I beg you... Please... If you are traveling through the airlines, please please please be a dick about it.

Do not allow yourself to be irradiated. Do not allow yourself to be groped. Do not allow yourself to be convinced that these fuckwits are doing, or possibly COULD do, anything to make you safe from terrorism.

Be as slow and unpleasant in the security stop as you possibly, possibly can.

Thanks... You're doing the Lord's work.

Amy was perfectly clear, but just to pile on:

> I have to come back tomorrow, the
> next day and the day after that to
> keep hearing these comments.

No! NO YOU DON'T! No one is forcing you to make a living by diminishing –mocking– the freedom of Americans. You're perfectly welcome to do something which actually adds value to people's lives... Or even something which TRULY makes them safer.

Cause this ain't it.

But Crid, its a tough job market out there and the holiday season! Have a heart!

There was a woman who called in on Limbaugh's show (Steyn was hosting and making hay of the TSA gropers) today about her husband being torn up about this as a TSA agent. She thought people were making too big of a deal about it. Her husband was making us "safe". Safe with "love pats" at the TSA loveshack.

Anyway, no sympathy here from me for the average TSA grunt. Sometimes you have to sacrifice to achieve liberty. For me that means I don't fly. For them if they have problems with it, quit the job.

From the article: "Do you think I want to go to work and place my hands between women's legs and touch their breasts for a few hours? For starters, I am attracted to men, not women..."

Hold it! Stop. Why is this woman even bringing her erotic inclinations to this task? This is examining for contraband, not for her to cop a feel.

She needs another job if she can't view the anatomy in clinical terms.

"...to try and feel inside the flab rolls of obese passengers"

Ewww, I hadn't thought of that. But it's true enough - I had an acquaintance once who regularly used his belly folds like pockets...

Rather than dehumanize the TSA TSOs, work with them, understand their views and opinions and work together to change the current TSA policies.

The problem is that they are as much sheeple as the traveler. If they said "No, this is not the answer. We're not going to pat down granny and we'll walk the five year olds around the scanners." Then I could support them. But confiscating nail clippers and Gerber's from military troops carrying unloaded M-16s tells me there is no common sense.

I absolutely hate using this comparison (but it is so àpropos)-- but this is the same thing as the Jews who worked for the NAZI's during before and during WWII. They said "If I hadn't done it someone else would have." The answer is that you have to have the testicles (or mammaries) to either do the job the right way, i.e. you and your co-workers say f' the rules we're scanning the Muslims only. Or you quit the job.

Right now the TSA is doing the "Everyone is guilty." attitude. I can even see the reason to search a 25 year old nun (ref to IRA in the '80s) but that is questionable. The odds of a 60 year old nun being a terrorist pawn are low.

The TSA workers are following the rules -- but that is also causing the scorn. They either need to defy their "superiors" (either locally or in D.C.), get the rules changed, or quit/walkout.

This mini-dissertation brings to mind the Die Hard II movie. It took showing the airport security head that he was totally wrong for him to come around. It needs to be done to the TSA as well.

Sounds like we have the makings of a grass roots effort to end this practice. If the TSA agents become as unhappy with this program as the general public, and speak up about it, then it won't quietly become acceptable.

I wouldn't say be a jerk about it, but I would say to make your opinion known - that this practice is a violation of personal behavior standards, of personal privacy, and of our rights in this country.

FTR, there's no way I'm allowing the body scan until I'm comfortable with the safety of this technology. I do not trust the TSA screening agents on their knowledge of the machines or the potential for failures.

I actually feel bad for a lot of the TSA agents. When they signed up for the job they probably didn't expect it to turn into this. But that doesn't matter now. They are the tip of the spear. If we cannot get the government to change the policy the only other option is to make the job so unattractive that it can no longer be staffed by anyone who can even appear competent.

Much like Chris Christie to the teacher bitching about her job- "You don't have to do it."

Problem solved. NEXT!!!

IMHO it is martial law light, with the added "benefit" of ruining another industry. Examine what the folly accomplishes.

Yeah, they are just following orders, like the Nazis. No sympathies for the TSA.

Okay. Let's notice something else here.

Though 9/11 was horrible and Americans today are obsessing in such a way as to totally validate the attack, that obsession is completely, utterly blinding people.

How?

Take a look at this page. I'll quote part of it so you'll know why you should click on a few of its links:

"DOT's goal is to place one ERG2008 in each emergency service vehicle, nationwide, through distribution to state and local public safety authorities. To date, nearly eleven million copies have been distributed without charge to the emergency response community. Copies are made available free of charge to public emergency responders through State Coordinators (refer to the menu on the right) in the United States of America."

Yes, this is because there are millions of tons of hazardous material traveling your railroads and streets today. Today! Hydrofluoric acid? Check. Chlorine? Check. Get the idea? Click on the links?

Hey, if I had 20 friends all crazy from a life of forced celibacy determined to hurt the Great Satan and check out a bunch of virgins in the afterlife, I can do a lot more than airliners.

Gee, remember the Beltway Sniper? Now, figure ten teams. Or 20 individuals just shooting as many holes in important things as possible. Just looking at airliners, I can tell you that taking off with a single bullet hole in the plane is not an option. One man can stop all departing air traffic at the airport and not even do anything but felony property damage. Now, she turns her attention to the propane depot, the natural gas line, the fuel semi on the bridge...

Life is dangerous, nobody else even has the ability, much less the duty, to protect you. Read the link, start to think, and don't believe the talking heads at all. Because their interests are not yours!

Napolitano says that if we don't like it, we can make other travel arrangements. If TSA employees don't like to grope us, they can quit their jobs. We can suck it up and take the next business flight, or frisk the next passenger. Either way, we are just following orders. Like Willie Loman, we have choices. The sale has to be made. The deal must be closed. And so it goes. Micheal Chertoff introduced the machines in 2007. He left Homeland Security to run his own consulting firm. A firm that represents the very company that makes these machines. But, people resisted because of health and privacy concerns. A marketting strategy was developed. Make the frisking so invasive, people would flock to the machines. If they chose neither, threaten to fine them $10K. The Military Industrial Complex has met the War on Terror. We are not being asked to give up our 4th Amendment rights to be safe from terrorists. We are giving them up so that the deal can be made. There's a lot of money to be made here. Welcome to War on Terror Inc, Mr Loman.

Life is not guaranteed, same with security. People who seek security over Liberty, deserve neither. You know what really sucks, political correctness. We're engaged in a long war with radical extremists of Muslim descent, killing "infidels" is their life-long mission. Going along with the program instituted at our airports means we have surrendered to these assholes, we are the the trustees of Liberty and Freedom and we cannot forsake that duty by turning a blind eye.

***satire on***

I think this is a great opportunity for streamlining. The TSA can move under the health care bureaucracy, and while the TSA is in the area they can go ahead and give mammograms, colonoscopies, and turn your head and cough tests.

Next up: gun free school zones will be the next health care initiative.

***satire off***

I actually feel bad for a lot of the TSA agents. When they signed up for the job they probably didn't expect it to turn into this.

I have not a single sympathy for the TSA agents. The day that they revolt against their authority and say "No we aren't doing that" I will support them.

That they haven't argued this makes no sense -- you took the job, you're doing the job, why should I have sympathy for you being an asshole. That you are following the rules when the rules have no sense -- let alone common sense -- screw you.

Sounds analogous to the excuses that human rights abusers and warcrimes perpetrators make when asked why they did what they did. "I was ordered to do so by my superiors/government!"

Wow. All this hate towards TSA grunts and none pointed towards ourselves for letting this happen? Quick Civics Lesson: we can change these policies ourselves at the ballot box. Or in the shorter term by not flying.

Sorry, Amy. Its not "sexual assault" if the pat-down is consensual. You have three choices: 1)X-ray, 2) pat-down, or 3) don't fly. #3 is probably the most effective if you really want this policy to change. But option #4 ("be an ass-hole to TSA") will likely produce the worst outcome for you and your fellow travellers.

@snakeman99 at November 20, 2010 8:03 AM

I don't have TSA. I do believe they are necessary. I just think they are crossing lines they shouldn't cross.

Ballot box is a tough way to fix this for a couple reasons. First, the TSA isn't the only issue, and single issue voting just doesn't work. Second, it's gradually crossing more and more lines has spanned governments and administrations all across the political spectrum. I think public backlash is the only thing that is going to change it.

Best,
Trust

@Trust - single-issue voting essentially replaced Gray Davis with the Governator in CA. Shrugging off our responsibilities as citizens is lazy thinking. And FWIW - I love public backlash. I think there IS a strong groundswell here to change the TSA procedures. I'm just saying that directing that anger towards the actual TSA officers is foolish and is far more likely to cause a delay for you and other people not likely to produce the desired outcome. Declining revenues on the other hand . . .

@Amy - our current choices suck, but its hyperbolic to call it "sexual assault" which implies some kind of prurient satisfaction on the part of the patter-downer. I didn't like having a prostate exam, but I doubt my doctor enjoyed it (or the hundreds others he performs in a given year) either.

@Amy Alkon: What about people who have jobs that require them to fly?
_______________

I agree. This notion that someone who travels for work (and often pleasure) can take a land option from NY to LA is just unrealistic. I'm a security professional, and I look at the risk like this: only a fraction of a percent of passengers intend harm, only a fraction of a percent of those could smuggle something on a plane, and only a fraction of a percent of those could carry out an attack without getting either caught by security or beat to a pulp by other passengers. Molesting me or taking an X-ray photo of my junk drop the risk from one in 10 million to one in 15 million....I'll keep my privacy and take the "risks" in a minute.

@snakeman99: "single-issue voting essentially replaced Gray Davis with the Governator in CA. Shrugging off our responsibilities as citizens is lazy thinking."
____________

I think single issue voting is laziness. I won't vote for the worst candidate overall over airline security alone. It factors in, as do many things.

I'm merely saying neither major party seems willing to do anything about this, and third parties just don't win enough. Outrage is our best bet right now.

We will continue to get what we will accept. I expect the House to hold hearings on this. I will be satisfied when the practice ends, and Napolitano is impeached.

Apparently federal employee unions have forgotten that THIS is the sort of thing they should be taking a stand against.

I think public backlash is the only thing that is going to change it.

I think so, too. There is a strong internal need for the TSA to be seen as doing something in response to newly discovered threats, and that something is to ratchet up the invasiveness of their procedures. This will be the case no matter which party is in charge; running an anti-scanning campaign would leave one open to charges of making us vulnerable to terrorism. The only way this changes is through extended traveler resistance which presses TSA to devise a face-saving alternative that does not appear to make things less secure. The security theater must be preserved at all costs.

Tweet.

OK, kids there is just one answer to this, if you think it's wrong.

Get out your writing materials, and stamps and start firing off letters. That's right, NOT EMAILS, letters. To your Airport, because they can replace the TSA even if they have to follow the rules. To all your congresscritters. To your favorite airlines. To Janet Napolitano. [even though she'll never listen] Tell them how you hate this, how ineffective it is, and remind them who the consumer is.

At this point good 'ol Janet is at the "patiently explaining to the whiners how they don't know anything" mode. If she was actually taking any of this seriously she'd go incognito, or have somebody on her staff do so, to find out why people are so up in arms. She'd be asking tough questions.

she doesn't do that because she's in CHARGE, in POWER. She doesn't see herself as a public servent. So with critical mass, is the only way to change her mind.

sure we can stay home or change our plans... that's fine. But if you do, you need to TELL SOMEONE WHY. Otherwise it looks like daily variability. A thousand people writing letters and voting with their feet, is much more powerful than 10,000 people just voting with their feet, because you are establishing for the powers that be, cause and effect, in a way they can't miss.

Importantly you need to do this EVEN IF you don't fly. I've long since stopped flying because it's too inconvenient and I don't travel for business. I'm going to write anyway, because this stuff is stupid and doesn't make anyone safer.

The people on the front lines of this should be well trained ticketing agents, because they are the first people you meet at the airport. D'yer remember right after 9/11 when there were military checkpoints to get into the airport, and actual guys walking around with weapons? I felt quite safe then because of the deterrence factor. But they didn't constantly search everyone. they were looking for people acting suspiciously. Admittedly those guys weren't all trained in what to look for in a terrorist, so it was much more show, but that might be what it takes. Having real trained security patrolling. Having real trained ticket agents asking various questions, not the same one every time... and maybe your basic metal detectors to keep out rifraff.

TSA is constantly figting the last war, instead of planning for the next... I think the public is figuring that out.

TSA is not allowed to unionize.

Napolitano says that if we don't like it, we can make other travel arrangements.

And get to Europe by what means? Boat? Blimp?

San Francisco to Denver is a three-and-a-half hour flight. It's a three-and-a-half day train ride. If I want to spend three days in Denver, flying requires a sacrifice of 4 days. Taking the train requires I sacrifice 10 days.

Random bit of math: 600,000,000 passenger-flights each year in the US. You used to be able to get on a plane by arriving 45 minutes ahead of time. Now its at least 90 minutes. So this security theater costs us 450,000,000 hours per year.

A person lives 80 x 365 x 24 = 508,000 hours

So TSA costs us the equivalent of 884 lives per year. So, in a cold-blooded kind of way, we could eliminate TSA, terrorists could crash 3 planes a year, and we would still be better off.

Think about it: TSA costs us 450,000,000 productive hours per year, not even counting the hours of their own personnel. Could that be part of the reason that the economy sucks?

Sure Conan... but in 1300 miles it s 2 day drive through beautiful country, on your schedule... I know it's a drag to drive 4 days to do a 3 day trip. It would suck for business... but it's an adventure fo a vacation. I go to SanDiego every year or two and I wouldn't fly, because when I get there to see my friends, I have a car... I visit momalady in Phoenix on the way... I have friends in Albuquerque I have lunch with.

It's a holdover from the oldnedays when flying was much more expensive than driving so we drove everywhere...

TSA agents need to stop whining about their treatment by airline passengers. They weren't drafted into TSA service. They can walk away from that job at any time.

And I don't know about the rest of you, but I find that most TSA agents are absolute jerks on power trips. Why the hell should any of us respect them, when most of them are verbally and physically abusive to us?

One exception from my experience. When I was very pregnant with #2 I had to fly. Because it was a last minute purchase, I got flagged for a pat down. The female TSA agent took one look at me and said "I would like to apologize to you. I'm sure you don't want to do this. I'm going to have to do this because of my job requirements, but if you'd like your husband right here, I'll be happy to go get him. I'll try to be as respectful as I can, and again, I'm sorry". I still wasn't happy about the pat down, but her attitude difused a lot of anger.

I think the body scans and searches are angering people, but, at least to me, the worst is the TSA agents attitude. Last summer flying out of Portland a TSA agent, a lady about the size of a Honda, pulled me and my then 7 and 4 year old out and ripped our luggage apart. She was so beyond rude, that when she was done, I broke my rule about bad language infront of the kiddos and said "Lady, I can count on one hand with fingers to spare the times I've used this word. But you are undoubtedly the bigget c*nt I've ever had the displeasure of encountering in my life."

If I worked for the TSA, I'd like to think that I would refuse to do this and get fired for not complying. I would ask for a written, signed and notorized statement for the reason for my dismissal. Then, if the TSA reverses its policy on pat-downs, I would be able to sue for wrongful termination and not worry about working again. At least, that's the way I would like it to work out. I don't know if it would actually work.

>>Be as slow and unpleasant in the security stop as you possibly, possibly can.

Actually, please don't be obviously unpleasant.

By all means, show you hate the system and consider it a pointless invasion of your person by saying so - politely & slowly - at the security point!

Do not be cowed by hostile/unprofessional behavior by TSA staff. Let them see you take names & notes - ready pursue it further.
Acquaint yourself with pat down guidelines in advance - so that you have a basis for complaining on the spot - if those guidelines are flouted (Amy's link about the horrific treatment of the woman with a prosthetic breast states where - exactly - the TSA did NOT follow their own stated rules).
Don't make empty threats about charging TSA staff with sexual molestation. You're wasting your breath (snakeman99 is right).
I also totally agree with SwissArmyD about writing letters (to local politicians/airlines etc).

But, above all, don't use this TSA nonsense as an excuse to indulge your inner asshole.

We are very frequent fliers in our family and there is very little that drains my considerable sympathy for other passengers in the security line than jerks who behave as though they were already spoiling for confrontation.

"Sorry, Amy. Its not "sexual assault" if the pat-down is consensual. " I argue that it isn't consensual. Look at what's happening here: in order to engage in a private transaction (buying an airline ticket), you are required by the government to sign away some of your constitutional rights. If the government can do this, then it can require that you consent to being strip-searched in order to buy groceries. Or agree to sign away your First Amendment rights in order to accept a private-sector job. It's a quick path towards unlimited government authority.

And I will argue that it's absolutely unconstitutional under the Tenth Amendment. The federal government simply does not have the power to arbitrarily inject itself into private transactions in this manner. And the attitude displayed by TSA officials about it suggests that they know this, and they're trying to set a marker down for a new expansion of government authority.

I'll add one other thing: For the time being at least, I think it behooves us to maintain a level of civility with the TSA front-line employees, assuming that they do the same. Here's why: If everyone is nasty to them, the ones who already don't like the job and sympathize with the pax will either quit or be fired. Their places will be taken by people who want that job, and are willing to put up with the insults in order to get it. Think about what kind of person we're talking about here.

Really, anyone who has the time, energy and guts needs to push. Refuse both the nude-o-scope and the grope. Remain calm and polite, but claim your fourth amendment rights: if they have no suspicion, they have no right to search you.

As pointed out on other blogs, they actually have no right to even request an ID from you - the airlines may have an interest in knowing who is on their plane, but this is not TSA's job.

Shrink the government. Start by eliminating TSA.

> Actually, please don't be obviously unpleasant.

No, be as unpleasant as you possibly, possibly can.

Thanks.

_______________

(Besides, Jody, weren't you like "Outta here"?)

> But, above all, don't use this TSA
> nonsense as an excuse to indulge
> your inner asshole.

To be perfectly clear:

IT IS INCUMBENT UPON YOU TO USE THIS TSA NONSENSE AS AND EXCUSE TO INDULGE YOUR INNER ASSHOLE.

...Not that you need an excuse. America is a wonderful country. Don't let foreigners fuck it up, even from within.

>>Besides, Jody, weren't you like "Outta here"?)

Crid,
I'm sorry if you misunderstood - I do occasionally write "outta here" after what is intended as my last comment in very, very long threads. It only refers to quitting that thread.
(Maybe it's a bit of a silly habit. I use it sometimes when I feel I've gone on & on/round in circles!)

"...its hyperbolic to call it "sexual assault" which implies some kind of prurient satisfaction on the part of the patter-downer."

Hmm. If you can't tell the difference between the airline passenger who has just stepped in from WalMart (reference peopleofwalmart.com) and our hostess, you have a problem.

Speaking from a respectful distance, a doll like her would be a distinct relief compared to Jabba and Mrs. Hutt.

> to call it "sexual assault" which implies
> some kind of prurient satisfaction

What could be more prurient than earning a typical government wage with typical government bennies for intruding on OTHER peoples rights?

I cannot understand the thinking of people who are patient with this. Can't understand it.

I really hope I don't need to get on a plane any time soon.

And as far as a 3 day train ride being like an adventure? I don't know about that. Usually I get a week off, which could count as 9 days if you include the weekend, so 3 days there, 3 days back, only 3 days to relax.

I tried a train trip several years ago. Took 11 hours for what would have been an 8 hour drive. The train left the station at about 1 am. It wasn't terrible, but I never wanted to do it again. 11 hours in a train, even when you can walk around, gets old really fast.

TSA is not allowed to unionize.

Posted by: ken in sc at November 20, 2010 10:08 AM

Not anymore. As of Friday, November 16, 2010 the Federal Labor Relations Authority changed the rules.

Tweet.

The war on drugs in the 70's and 80's was about pacifying the inner cities where the natives were getting distinctly uppity. The later expansion into the amphetamine business was to get the trailer park trash whites who were starting to look like a threat with the militias. The airport business is about expanding the subservient mindset to the middle class. The reason that all the "terrorist" threats are centered around planes is that airports offer a unique nexus of control of the middle class.

It seems that TSA agents are very busy profiling. But not for terrorists:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/1147497-tso-saying-heads-up-got-cutie-you.html

> TSA agents are very busy profiling

Tell me you're a citizen of the United States.

This blog has a fascinating disproportion of people from other nations who comment intimately about our national affairs.

I find this troubling.

Say - here's an idea for protesting the TSA Nude-O-Scope: draw a totally legal picture or compose a sentence on your skin with a silver Sharpie.

It'll be visible on the scope, and carefully applied, completely legal. It's the T-shirt slogan you reserve for the scope guys!

So: what do you think such a thing should say?

For Christ's sake, they're molesting us as the genitalia. When a terrorist action DOES happen, how will they raise the stakes? Where can they go from here?

AT the genitalia. This pisses me off so much it goofs up my spelling. Napolitano is everything I hate about governance.

I've had good luck with TSA. When I was pregnant, I didn't want to go through the scanner so they did a quick patdown. They were very nice and friendly and not sexually inappropriate. Also, when I moved this summer I carried a bunch of silver on board (not knives or forks) and of course it set off the metal detectors. They were very polite as they went through my bags, letting me take the time to carefully unwrap and rewrap everything. They could have been obnoxious about my carrying tons of metal but they weren't.

Having said that...

... and at the risk of sounding paranoid...

... sometimes I wonder if the government wants to stop us from traveling, especially to other countries, for reasons of their own. Like how in Russia they weren't allowed to just up and go to the West. I wonder if the US is headed in that direction.

So: what do you think such a thing should say?

"Are you enjoying this?"
"Are we going to screw later?"

Now I haven't been able to find the actual source for this -- but supposedly Napolitano is considering a waiver for Muslim women. If that happens I'm going to declare myself a Muslim women and defy them to tell me different. ;-)

This is the same thing that the IRA did in the '80s to smuggle guns -- they would get women (and men) to dress up in habits to smuggle guns.

At least you never had her as govener

"sometimes I wonder if the government wants to stop us from traveling, especially to other countries, for reasons of their own. Like how in Russia they weren't allowed to just up and go to the West. I wonder if the US is headed in that direction."

Nicole, it's long been a leftist fantasy to restrict the general population to specific neighborhoods, and limit travel to people that the government considers VIPs. I have a Popular Mechanics (!) issue from the late 1960s that outlines this "utopian" fantasy. Cities would consist of clusters of cookie-cutter neighborhoods, each consisting of high-density apartment/office buildings, one grocery store, one clothing store, one clinic, etc.

Ordinary citizens would not have access to any form of mechanized travel; that would be restricted to "government employees on official business" (i.e., Party members). The article proudly states that "most citizens will be outside of their own neighborhood only twice: when they are brought home from the hospital as infants, and when they are taken out for burial." The article didn't say, but presumably every neighborhood would be surrounded by a perimeter wall and armed guards to keep hapless citizens from wandering out of their own neighborhoods. Because if they started comparing notes, they might get ideas. Can't have that.

Christian women too are required by our religion to practice modesty and faithfulness. It wasn't so long ago that women of various Christian religions covered our heads in church, and the practice of women wearing pants (men's clothing) is still not quite accepted in many Christian religions. Just because Jesus didn't object to women's faces and freedom doesn't mean Christians don't feel it essential to be secure against our bodies being handled against our will by persons with power over us.

How does one teach children about the sanctity of their bodies if not by respecting their modesty? As parents, we respect and nurture a young child's dawning sense of self by showing that even their own parents are not going to touch or view their bodies except when essential out of love. Does anyone really think a child can go through a law enforcement criminal frisk by strangers - once or regularly - without internalizing a sense of violation? Does anyone really think a child can watch their parents treated like criminals and powerless without being robbed of their right to believe their parents can protect them from all scary things?

We are not criminals and our government has no right to treat us as such for any reason at any time.

We said No. No means No.

For once, Crid and I are in 100% agreement. (I hope that doesn't make Crid change his position.)

Don't go in the scanner. Fight the grope. Be loud and ugly about it. And don't shut up. Write letters. Talk to anyone who will listen. Pin them into a chokehold if they refuse to listen, and make them listen. This matters. It matters a lot.

The terrorists don't scare me nearly as much as the people who are holding their hands over their ears yelling "BAAAAAA" just so they won't have to hear a word of reason. You can't have a Hitler or a Stalin without a boatload of sheep. We've apparently got a Titanic full of sheep to deal with on this issue, and that's why those of us who are not sheep need to fight.

How the hell did we get from "Give me liberty or give me death" to "please, please, do whatever you want to me, and please don't anyone tell me why it won't make me any safer"? How?

My children, ages 8 and 10, have never been on an airplane. I've been thinking about taking them on a trip to see my aunt in Colorado, and now I had to tell them that it might never happen. And, I didn't hesitate to tell them why. My daughter practically had tears in her eyes at the thought of anyone seeing her naked body OR touching her! There's nothing, and I mean NOTHING that will make me put my kids through that. When I read that Obama "understands our frustrations" but considers these security measures a necessary evil, my blood just boiled. We cannot get him out of office soon enough.

Now, please notice you are where the 2nd Amendment people have been for a long time.

> "Are you enjoying this?"
> "Are we going to screw later?"

Fun tweets from this week included the suggestion that we call the "Gate rape", and that if you're in the mood, you make some sex noises while it's going down.

THERE, honey.... right THERE

The article proudly states that "most citizens will be outside of their own neighborhood only twice: when they are brought home from the hospital as infants, and when they are taken out for burial."

Heh, the author didn't think this one through... wouldn't they have to leave as adults, to go to the hospital to HAVE the infants???

I do wonder, though.

snakeman99 wrote...

Sorry, Amy. Its not "sexual assault" if the pat-down is consensual. You have three choices: 1)X-ray, 2) pat-down, or 3) don't fly. #3 is probably the most effective if you really want this policy to change. But option #4 ("be an ass-hole to TSA") will likely produce the worst outcome for you and your fellow travellers.

B.S.! That's a Hobson's Choice. Quick and easy travel is too deeply entrenched in our culture and economy. Not flying is not a reasonable option for many people. Jobs require quick travel. Families are scattered across the country and even the world. I have a court order that requires me to send my son across the country three times a year. You seriously think I should send him on a bus!? Are you a pedophile hoping to enrich your target pool? (Oh! I get it. You just applied for a job at the TSA, didn't you?) Do you think I should quit my job and relocate, knowing that my ex-wife could move again any time she wants? Don't be an idiot. Options 1 and 2 are illegal, warrantless searches that do absolutely nothing to enhance anyone's security. The only reasonable option is resistance.

cousin dave wrote...

I'll add one other thing: For the time being at least, I think it behooves us to maintain a level of civility with the TSA front-line employees, assuming that they do the same. Here's why: If everyone is nasty to them, the ones who already don't like the job and sympathize with the pax will either quit or be fired. Their places will be taken by people who want that job, and are willing to put up with the insults in order to get it. Think about what kind of person we're talking about here.

I disagree, Dave. That's exactly what we want and for the same reason we want the enemy on the battlefield to wear uniforms. It's always good to know who the enemy is.

If Obama were really concerend about our "frustrations" he'd send his own daugters thru the nudie cam and pedo pat down assemby line

I have to fly in February (and no, taking the train to another continent isn't an option, thanks).

My plan: wear a headscarf. I can pass for vaguely Middle Eastern with some bronzer. They'll be so polite to me because the TSA will terrified of offending my modesty and Muslim sensibilities.

Second part of the plan: vomit. I throw up very easily and can make myself puke just by gagging once or twice. If I do get pulled out for a patdown, I'll wait until the TSA agent's head is about waist level and throw up all over them.