Bad people -- con men, perverts, bullies, thieves, lawyers -- use our inclination towards politeness and decorum against us. The masher in the subway thinks you'll not want to make a scene by yelling. The asshole who cuts you off and takes your parking space thinks that you won't do anything to draw attention your yourself. The lout who asks rude questions (how much did you pay for it? Hey, what's wrong with your kid?) thinks you will be too confined by manners to tell them off. The crook thinks you'll be too embarrassed to make a stink when you've been defrauded.

But etiquette, decency, and good citizenship do not require being a doormat. Overt, deliberate wrong may be identified loudly and publicly as such.

Well, said, Alkon!

I concur with James to the extent you should not be rude to people who are only doing their jobs.

The $12-an-hour TSA scanner, pat-downer, just needs a job. He or she did not make policy. They would be happy not to pat you down if and when the orders are issued from on high.

And no, being patted down is not equal to, say, having your right to vote abrogated (as in the U.S. South, up until 1970 or so), or being shot for doing a good reporting job (happens in Mexico, Russia).

The pat-down falls in there with the City of Los Angeles clerk who us supposed to comply with a Freedom of Information Act request, and does so--but only after a few days or weeks has passed. Or the guy who gets his property re-zoned when you can't, under identical circumstances.

I am amazed that we waste $1 trillion a year on a Department of Defense-VA-Homeland Security megaplex, but what some people want to snivel about is pat-downs.

So how much is $1 trillion?

About $3,333 for every man, woman, and child in the USA.

In fact, since only about one-half of the population pays income taxes, I can assume I kicked in $6000 last year to the defense-VA-homeland security boondoggle-arama.

Pat downs? Hell, I would dance naked at the airport if I could just get my $6000 back.

That's $6,000, every year. In the next 10 years, $60k.

People, put your thinking caps on.

Pat me down, but can I have my share of the $1 trillion--every year--back?

Ahhh.

James, and BOTU: moan with pleasure at the idea of being sodomized by a government agent who are so NOBLE as to endure your presence as they heroically do their job!

Thrill to the idea of submission. You're guilty of something. The patdown is sweet, sweet release.

So what if they didn't change their gloves after the last guy. Mmmm - MMMM!

And James? All you have to do to teach your daughter not to be a self-sufficient, ambitious woman is keep on doing what you're doing. I'm sure she'll be fine counting on others, and not a serial thug-mat pumping out bullet stops.

Both of you have said, "Sit back and enjoy it!"

No.

In fact, since only about one-half of the population pays income taxes, I can assume I kicked in $6000 last year to the defense-VA-homeland security boondoggle-arama.

Perhaps, but since your state of Kentucky is pretty high on the list of "molly-coddled rural states" that get back more than they pay, you probably broke even.

December 1, 1955, Rosa Parks refuses to give up her seat when ordered to do. 'James' writes on her blog: "Dear Ms Parks. I dont [sic] know you, but I dont see why you made such a fuss, maybe you have nothing better to do? What exactly is wrong with giving up your seat on a bus? You are lucky that you live in a period of history and in a corner of the world where you are not living in a hovel, a slave, subject to rape/murder at someones whim....the more you give to people the more they have to complain about. you are comming across as a self important, arrogant 'princess'."

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 thane 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

Actually, I think locking cabin doors and giving pilots shotguns would have done the trick.

But then what would happen to the $1 trillion we waste every year on federal coprolite, in the form of the Department of Defense-VA-Homeland Security boondoggle-lalapalooza?

And who would keep up the national boo-hoo-arama over 9/11?

Do you realize that by 1955, ten years after WWII, life had returned to a completely boring normal in the USA?

Do you realize the USA lost more 400,000 soldiers in WWII? That the Soviet Union lost more than 25 million in civilian deaths?

We lost 3,000 in 9/11.

The national weep-a-than and glorification of the military bonanza will commence soon....

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.

I was meaning to write this a few days ago or yesterday but BOTU again rears his head. First off BOTU I am worried about you. Have you anything original to say - come on you just pulled the military angle - again! Hey I can agree with you about the Military Industrial complex and the waste of money it is, but come on - you can be a better rabble rouser and troll. The military spending topic is not really related to this.

Also BOTU on the previous thread just yesterday you went off on your rant about prostitution and sex with children on the topic with freedom. Careful with the slippery slope analogies man. Still the topic of prostitution and window shopping and even sex with children gets brought up by you quite regularly. A guy that is known for living and going to Thailand regularly. This makes me think one thing - he likes it or does it?! The old idea of those that protest something are very likely one of those that actually support it. Careful man something is showing there.

So how would you feel the idea that anybody that goes to Thailand is likely a pedophile or a drug user and anybody who comes back from there should be searched and drug tested. How would you feel about that? Just for going to one place you would have to submit to loss of some freedoms.

Now BOTU I am not completely without sin - regulars that know me (do they know me?) that if John posts he will likely bring up or comment on Korea. Sorry about that. But I try to make it relevant to the topic. Please BOTU try harder, your asshole behavior does add that little Je ne sais quoi to this blog. A sort of an extra spice. But lately you are just becoming annoying (more the usual) and irrelevant.

Now on to the topic. I do feel the Ms. Alkon did slightly bring this upon herself. Repeat slightly but.... she did not deserve it. She decided to raise a stink about being searched before hand and be aggressive/loud. These actions likely got her noticed and irritated the TSA goon. Then when she got searched she got violated. AND I do believe she was violated.
This is the same way I can feel about a woman that is wearing a mini-skirt and walking in a dark alley gets raped. Stupid actions brings a bad result but that does not that the person deserves it. Ms Alkon is correct in that being polite is nice but people should not be polite everywhere, sometimes you have to fight or be a bitch. for example...

"Dear Ms. Post"
Yesterday, while I was being accosted - I pushed my attacker and called him and bad word. He got angry at that action and proceeded to beat me. For future reference what is the proper way to act when getting mugged. Should I use formal titles like Mister and do I tip the mugger.

Being polite pays but the above would be ridiculous.

She could have been a bit smarter or done something different to express her dissatisfaction with the search - like the middle finger out.

But in the same vain - Ms Magee also brought her own stupid actions to light and the situation. Here she is a professional (ha) who has to deal with someone who is being difficult. SO she decides to be a little to hands on and up very up. She should have ignored Ms. Alkon, done a basic pat down and got her on her way. Or even better had her stand to the side and have someone else search her.

Wow I keep going on - sorry. More later.

Miniskirt wearers deserve rape? Boy, are you a loon!

KateC - please read again! I did not say that! I was commenting on the if a woman is raped and she was wearing a mini-skirt or in the wrong place like a dark alley. Because of those action somebody might comment that said person deserved it. Me I do not believe in deserve it but believe that actions have consequences.

Ms. Alkon bless her heart had decided to fight against the injustice of being searched for flights. She has taken up the mantel. She travels quite a bit so when she had the chance of being searched she decided to raise her voice and express her opinion. In doing so she has to suffer the consequences. It could have been from simply be given a more thorough search, being delayed and missing her flight, or even nothing at all. But no - she got a over aggressive busy body who decided to shove her hand sideways into her privates for what people feel is revenge. I can see why this happened because of Ms Alkons actions. But deserve it - NO!

In the same way - Ms "Thug"alee also did something and is surprised by the consequences. She violated somebody who has a platform and people who listen to her. Her bad behavior got her noticed and named. Does she deserve to be ridiculed and shamed. Well a little of me says yes - but it is her fault - actions have consequences. Ms TSA groper should have ignored Ms. Alkon comments and behavior and done her search and got her on her way.

Maybe this man should remember what happened in Nazi Germany when citizens complied despite knowing a situation was wrong. If more people fought back then we wouldn't be talking about Holocaust survivors. We'd be talking about a time in history when a strong group of people fought for their rights instead of being marched into ovens. And no, I'm not blaming the Jewish people. I'm just pointing out that they did what they were told and look what happened.

BOTU: Voting isn't a right.

Jim P. I dont know you but I love you. You just made my fucking day with your posts.

BOTU, I was wondering when you were going to pop up here and tell us all to submit. Go ahead and bend over.

"The $12-an-hour TSA scanner, pat-downer, just needs a job. He or she did not make policy. They would be happy not to pat you down if and when the orders are issued from on high."

Hey, they're just following orders! Right?

There are other jobs out there besides working for uncle sam BOTU. I don't give a good god damn anymore about TSA agents feelings. They have a problem with the policies, quit otherwise I count them as the enemy of liberty. They can thus go to hell.

Actually, my wife and family live in rural Thailand. I do get scanned and questioned every time I enter Thailand, or get on the plane to go to Thailand. It annoys me.

That said, I would prefer to have back the $6k my government wastes every year on defense-VA-homeland security, and still get patted down, than vice versa.

In fact, I don't get patted down when I go to Thailand. I just walk through the scanner, or metal detector. Big whoop. If I did get patted down, it would annoy me, but not much. Sheesh, in high school I had to shower after gym in a roomful of inner city thugs. I suppose now that is considered harmful to children etc. In college I had to shower after exercising in a room with many homosexuals ( I went to school in the Bay Area, and gays loved the gym).

I frankly think people are way too uptight in America, and have developed victimization cults.

When they take away your right to vote or free speech, call me. In fact, I am riled up that we routinely ban sidewalk vendors and push-cart food vendors in the USA (always by local government)

I have written letters, and done what I can within my limited abilities to start a push-cart movement. It is going nowhere.

This whole discussion reminds me a lot of the tragic incident a few years ago in Vancouver where a brand new Polish immigrant, Robert Dziekanski, was before he ever left the airport. The police and their supporters (like BOTU & James) immediately took the position, "the authorities can't be at fault". Then a traveler's video was released and the truth was revealed.

Clearly it's important in a law-abiding society for citizens to give authorities a default amount of respect. But the notion that individual people in authority can't violate that tacit agreement is beyond moronic. Yet that's exactly what the two trolls in question here are doing.

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 thane passengers can afford to lose their lives.

This highlights the problem I have with most of the regulations that I have seen - the specification of the method used to provide whatever they are mandating, whether it is airline security or vehicle emissions. There may be a better way to do something, but you can't do it unless you get the regulations changed first. Give us guidelines, if something HAS to be mandated (we can talk about whether or not it needs to be elsewhere), don't tell us HOW WE HAVE TO DO IT!

Yeah, Amy! I agree with James! What's wrong with you that you can't show a little refinement and delicacy when a total stranger is pushing her hands in your vagina without your permission?

Why couldn't you just have said, "Excuse me, but I think what you're doing is not very nice, and I'm not enjoying this at all. Would you please take your hands out of my vagina?"

My goodness! What's the world coming to when people think merely being sexually assaulted is a license to make an all-out boor of yourself. Shame on you, Amy! What would Miss Manners say?

Not surprising that BOTU believes he has the right to violate other's rights. But then, that's what voting is all about.

I love Miss Manners, too! She's a riot! My favorite column of hers was about this woman who wrote to her for advice on how to deal with her "rude" coworkers.

It seems she went to a florist to purchase a rare tropical plant. The florist didn't have it, and said that it would take four to six weeks to order. There was one in the shop, but that had been reserved for someone else who had placed their order four weeks prior. Disappointed, she ordered one, and returned home. That very day, she got a call from the florist shop, telling her that her plant had arrived and that she could come pick it up. Overjoyed, she returned to the florist shop, only to discover that they had mistaken her for the person who had ordered the plant four weeks prior. She took advantage of their confusion and bought the plant.

She told her coworkers about this, and to her amazement, they were abrupt, quiet and cold to her the rest of the day. (Gee, imagine that!)

She asked Miss Manners how to explain to her coworkers that their "rudeness" hurt her feelings.

Miss Manners replied that "they weren't being rude. On the contrary, silence is the politest way of expressing moral outrage. Miss Manners, who feels a sudden chill herself, would suggest that if you're going to cheat people, you resist bragging about it."

I clipped that column and saved it. It's hilarious.

That said, I would prefer to have back the $6k my government wastes every year on defense-VA-homeland security, and still get patted down, than vice versa. -BTOU

So you would rather fuck over the GIs who made the world safe enough for you to live overseas and get molested by government rent a cops?

You do realize that all you have to do to stop paying for GIs is to give up your citizenship and stop paying taxes

You go girl!

I discussed what is going on and linked to you at Classical Values and Power and Control.

Illegitimi non carborundum and Give 'em HELL Amy.

TSA = Transportation Sexual Abuse

Couple of comments. Just because some of you are OK with having your bodies viewed in the porno scanner or getting groped by someone does not mean the rest of us should be. What about those who are survivors of assault and have fought for years to have any perception of control over their bodies. What about the TSA asking women to remove their sanitary napkins and soil themselves all so they can touch their genitals to make sure they're not carrying explosives. Folks let's look at this logically for a moment. How much explosive would it take to really take down a plane? Keep in mind a few facts - a small hole in the planes exterior will not necessarily bring it down - the cabin will decompress but pilots have safely landed planes in these circumstances. Explosives that pack a real punch are typically very volitle and difficult not only to transport but to assemble. Ex. the undwear bomber - not only would the powder he had not have done much damage, but the porno scanners would never have detected it anyway. Explosives like C4 are hard putty like substances and would need to be present literally in a large brick like size or more to bring down a plan - very obvious in a light back of the hands pat down - a full poke of the smegeggy isn't required to find this kind of stuff.

Then let's look at security alternatives. Certain countries in Europe and even cities in Florida have been doing a secured iris scan - this is a great way to provide a tamper proof trusted traveler program. I'd be more than happy to pay a few hundred myself to participate. I've no problem with someone poking around in my background, I do have a problem with someone poking around in my panties. The only thing I have to hide is my naked body. It's mine and no government official is entitled to look at it or touch it - period.

And what happens when a trusted traveller is comprimised because someone kiddapped his wife or kids?

And what happens when a trusted traveler is compromised because someone kidnapped his wife or kids? -- lujlp at September 10, 2011 9:15 AM

TT = Trusted Traveler

Let's break this thought down a little:

The TT has to blow the plane he's traveling on out of the sky, with a 99.9% chance he will die as well. How will he ever know if his family is safe?

The TT has to get weapons past security. The bad guys have to monitor the TT the whole time so that he doesn't tip off security. Fine he makes it past security -- you then run into the reason the TSA is not needed. Seventy minutes after the impact on Tower Two the unarmed passengers took down the hijackers on Flight 93.

The TT becomes an Islamic Terrorist overnight. No one is suggesting the TT gets a free pass through security. But the mandate should be that the individual airlines (or a group of them) have to decide what level of security they want. Maybe the TT gets just a magnetometer and an x-ray of his luggage. But as pointed out -- it takes a lot to blow an aircraft out of the sky. Take a guess how long that airline would survive if they lost multiple aircraft.

The 9/11 attack was a one time, blow the whole wad, attack. The odds of it being repeated are somewhere between small and infinitesimal. The model was changed September eleventh, 2001. It will never go back.

Airport security focuses entirely too much on passengers and almost none on the people who service the airport and aircraft.
A good hacker can phony up a boarding pass using a stolen credit card, and there's no certain way to detect it.

You're assuming the TT would alos blow up the plane as oppsed to just smuggling one component of something past security and then leaving it in a bathroom.

Incedentally I agree with you that such an attack will in all likleyhood never occur again, I was just making a point that a TT progrman is just as much a peice of shit episode of security theater as is the TSA apparatus

Airport security focuses entirely too much on passengers and almost none on the people who service the airport and aircraft. A good hacker can phony up a boarding pass using a stolen credit card, and there's no certain way to detect it. -- jefe at September 10, 2011 10:00 PM

You're assuming the TT would also blow up the plane as opposed to just smuggling one component of something past security and then leaving it in a bathroom.

Analyzing it again -- you can blow planes out of the sky all day, with some impact on the ground (e.g. Lockerbie, Continental Flight 3407 short of Buffalo Airport, American Flight 587). The odds of a single airplane falling on an electrical plant, nuke facility, or petroleum tank farm, or other vital structure are again miniscule. If you blow up one plane a week, you might actually get to the numbers that die in one day of any and all causes in the U.S.

To use a plane as a not-so-smart missile means you have to control the aircraft. Post 9/11 you would need about a 30-50% of the occupants to be actively on the terrorists side to actually penetrate the cockpit door and still hold the rest of the aircraft hostage.

I was just making a point that a TT program is just as much a piece of shit episode of security theater as is the TSA apparatus.

It is and isn't the answer -- but that should be up to the airlines to decide, not the TSA. If an airline or group of airlines wanted to implement a TT program in parallel or in conjunction with frequent flyer program that would be their choice of how much security they want.

An anecdote from the late 80's. I was flying from Abilene, Tx to L.A. via DFW. I walked into the Abilene airport, dealt with one of the two clerks for my airline. There were two others for the other airline. There was a security guard on duty who was about 50 and the magnetomer wasn't even powered up. I was on a twin engine plane that may have been able to accommodate 40 passengers. When I got to DFW, I had to go through a magnetometer and my carry-on was an x-ray scan to get on the big bird to L.A. But that was a fairly easy experience. This was during the height of the European terrorism.

I flew from San Luis Obispo to Dayton about two year ago. The airport was the same size as Abilene. The customer service was abysmal, the TSA agents were surly, they had a broken down x-ray scanner and weren't worried about the passengers inconvenience. I then had to go through a second light screening at LAX.

As it currently stands -- I have to go through the full screening if I was living in a major city and want to get a puddle jumper to fly home for a weekend family event.

There is no discretion, no common sense, reality to any of what the TSA or its component regulations require or entail.

I find myself agreeing with John Paulson's 1:24am post.

I also was pretty uncomfortable with the way Ms. Alkon handled her situation but not really able to articulate, even to myself, precisely why.

I think it boils down to the fact that I would have handled it differently, with less drama and tears. Not a sheep, but not with the extrovert flair, either.

Fact is, we haven't travelled by plane in many years. Mostly to avoid the hassle. We've had some awesome road trips though.

Those are my only options? Drama and tears or quiet acceptance? Neither one works for me. I'd probably respond differently.

Better for whom? Maybe not for you, but definitely for me.

I did not say you could not have hysterics in the terminal, merely that I was uncomfortable with your response and probably would have not acted in the same manner.

You need to note that Amy is not suing the TSA or its agents. She is being sued for stating what happened and her opinion of the TSA agent's actions.

One more time, LauraGr: how would you respond?

i'm proud of you AMY! i wish my own daughters were screaming about it. if more people were making noise, maybe we wouldn't be going over the cliff. you are very courageous and don't ever let some jerk tell you that standing up for your own personal sovereignty is RUDE!

LauraGr? Hello?