Fargo police say passenger slapped security officer at airport (w/ pass)

[Newsjock]

http://www.grandforks.com/mld/grandforks/10324452.htm

Associated Press

FARGO, N.D. - A woman trying to leave this city's airport may face an assault charge for slapping a security supervisor with her boarding pass, police said.

The 48-year-old swiped at the female agent's face after being told she must be patted down for repeatedly setting off metal detectors, Lt. Tod Dahle said.

"She said if anybody was going to touch her, she was going to touch them," Dahle said. The woman was trying to board a flight about 8:15 a.m. on Wednesday back to her home state of Washington.

The woman was "just an average middle-aged person who got upset," Dahle said.

more

[Sanity Claws]

1. Flying is very upsetting these days

The patting down is very offensive to us women. It's humiliating to have someone feel your breasts like that in public. Men in the area will just stand there and stare as the security person feels up the woman's breasts.
As for setting off the alarm, women's bras often have enough metal in them to set off an alarm. It's happened to me.

[flygal]

7. This is another way for the administration to "corral" citizens

Why the hell do we need a pat down? Couldn't someone shove explosives up their ass? I guess that's next - body cavity searches!

[ReadTomPaine]

8. Yes - getting the citizenry used to invasive searches for no reason...

So when they come into your home and do the same thing, they can say that it happens in airports already, so don't complain. It's for your safety, after all.

I felt the same way about the Washington sniper hysteria when whole section of I95 were shut down with autos and drivers still on them and searched car by car. Normal citizen were held against their cars with shotguns placed against their head while the police went about their unreasonable searches.

It also desensitizes police, and gets them used to herding and abusing their fellow citizens. Some, of course, need no help with that.

RTP

[amazona]

117. sure they could but everyone won't

You plug the leaks you can. More people would be willing to put contraband in a shoe than in their anus. It's simple human nature. We can't stop everyone -- doesn't mean it isn't wrong to stop what terrorists and smugglers we can.

[Delphinus]

30. Amen!

That's why I refuse to fly again - unless it's on my way out of here.
Every time I've flown since 9-11 I've been wanded. I refuse to allow myself to be violated again.

If I go west to see my son, it will be by train.

[notadmblnd]

58. I refuse to fly to

I'll be damned if I'll have my privacy invaded and pay for it too? Not a chance. My repuke friend got made at me when I told her I would not fly to Fla to visit her (she even offered to buy my ticket). She told me I was giving in to the terrorists. I said no, I'm not afraid of "terrorists" that it was a matter of principle. She just couldn't understand how I couldn't out aside my principles for a free vacation.

[saigon68]

61. I REFUSE TOO

They can go screw themselves.

[MADem]

71. You should tell your friend that you are FIGHTING

...the terrorists...the terrorists who have taken over our nation and expect us to bow to their fascist ways without a peep. When you give up that much liberty for a smidgen of security you get neither. While you are being felt up from stem to stern, UNEXAMINED cargo is going into the same damn plane you are flying in. And once you give in without complaint to a search of your person, the jackbooted thugs on your porch at three a.m. are next...

I'm learning to love my car. I used to fly a lot, now I do it as rarely as I can manage. I find the whole process intrusive, offensive and unnecessary.

[TahitiNut]

122. Set "aside my principles for a free vacation"???

That's it in a nutshell. For Reichbots, "principles" are cheap. They pick them up in the trash and, if they can sell them for a "free vacation," they regard it as a good profit.

And we all know that a profit is God's Messenger. :eyes:

[reprobate]

74. I refuse to fly for safety reasons.

No, not the threat of terraists, I'm talking about aircraft safety.

In a time when airlines won't provide proper electronic screening by explosive detectors because of the cost involved, with the FAA (the ones who set the repair and maintenance proceedures)basically owned by the airline corporations, with airlines cutting cost everywhere, and with Alaska Air still a frightening memory, I give the airlines all the trust I would give Enron.

To all this trust I will add the fact that hold baggage and packages are given a free pass, and IMO anyone who flies without being dragged onto the plane is foolish. I do realize that some people MUST fly for business or famiy emergancy reasons. Those folks have my sympathy.

Meanwhile, we have no effective high speed rail, unlike the rest of civilized society. Hell, we have no effective rail, period. Lets face facts, if the airlines didn't own congress does anyone thing there wouldn't be a high speed rail system across this nation?

[KyndCulture]

2. I live near Fargo

It was a slap with a boarding pass... in Fargo, you get outta jail the next day if you shoot up your apartment complex with an assault rifle...

I'm not too worried about her... but very proud of her!

[uppityperson]

3. I flew out of Fargo recently and felt like slapping everyone

Grew up there too and left long ago. However, I couldn't find a usa flag lapel pin anywhere, not at benfranklins, not at the hardware or pharmacy or even at the truck stop. They had Iraq and tank stickers, but no flags. We agreed that they probably would get them out again come the next national disaster. On the one hand it was reassuring they weren't all over as those annoying magnetized ribbons were. On the other hand, why couldn't I find even one? Guess it wasn't the political season.

[Sannum]

4. Give this woman a medal!

[MADem]

85. HA! The medal would set off the metal detectors!!! n/t

[I Love Alaska]

5. Boarding pass

I cant believe they are trying to place an assault charge on her for slapping the agent with a boarding pass.

[NYC]

6. Especially under the circumstances.

More women need to refuse this intrusion.

[UpInArms]

9. I only flew sporadically prior to 9/11

and will never fly again - especially with their mauling of women and having a wonderful time doing it.

I think that this charge is backwards - the person wanting to touch this lady should be charged with assault.

I call it a self-defense or "pre-emptive" strike.

[tx_dem41]

10. What type of system do you propose for airport security?

I realize that since you haven't flown in 3 yrs, you are hardly the expert. But, I'm curious....

[annabanana]

11. if any kind of "pat down" is required..........

at the VERY LEAST a private place could be arranged.

[phylny]

13. From what I read, you DO HAVE the right to demand the search

take place in a private place, and for a female worker to do it. Not that I want anyone groping me, but at least it might reduce some of the humiliation women feel.

[tx_dem41]

16. Not only do you have the right to demand....

....I have never seen the TSA male staff try to do a pat down. It might be popular to make these people seem like incompetent thugs to make some cheap political point, but I appreciate the overall professionalism I have seen from them during the last 2 yrs. Much better than the private companies that did it before.

[Patiod]

87. I fly a lot for work, and agree - they've gotten more professional

Right after 9/11 was a nightmare - I am not making this up: two airports on the same trip, (KMC and FTL) my baggage was searched by a one-armed employee (different person!). It's not that I have a problem with one-armed employees, but why wasn't he wanding people, and not searching bags (which needs two hands)? Plus I got a lot of lip from smart-ass, miminum-wage-attitude, untrained kids. Much much better now - much more polite well-trained people.

Also, because I travel multiple-leg trips instead of round-trip, my bags were searched at EVERY FREAKING POSSIBLE POINT AT EVERY SINGLE AIRPORT - both at security AND at the gate, etc. Which is fine, but I'm a female packing 1-2 weeks' worth of clothes in a carry-on, so re-packing after a search is a nightmare. I used to go up to the gate agent and volunteer to be searched early, so I could board with everyone else and find a spot for my bag.

At least now, they seem to have abandoned the notion that anyone flying anything but round-trip is a terrorist.

At far as patdown searches, here's the deal - if you fly, you wear a sports bra, a metal-less outfit, no jewelry, and shoes that slip off easily. And you waltz through security. If not, you're going to get wanded down and patted down. It's that simple.

I feel bad for the folks who have metal implants that set off the detectors, but most other folks can avoid the hassle by thinking ahead and dressing for the occasion.

[tx_dem41]

90. You and I must have been flying the same flights post 9/11

I had a lot of multiple-leg trips myself, and got searched every single time (at the checkpoint and at the gate).

As you state in your post, those that fly a lot have learned to adapt to these new procedures. If policy is not being followed, as is readily apparently by several personal testimonials in this thread, then it has to be changed. I'm the first to agree with that.

But as a frequent flyer, I am not going to argue that many of these security procedures are absolutely necessary and need to be improved. We are customers of this industry, and should demand it.

[Patiod]

92. 100% of those being searched were business travelers

because they are the ones on multiple-leg trips. I'd watch all sorts of shady characters board with unmolested baggage (or backpacks) because they held round trip tickets, whereas all of us silver- or gold or platinum (or whatever) frequent flyers were searched. At Kansas City, you can see the gate from the security checkpoints, and they actually would search my bags at both points. Where exactly was I going to pick up a weapon in the twenty feet between checkpoints?

I think a lot of it is for show. I carry a scented candle in a tin (for smelly hotel rooms) and NO ONE has opened it yet.

One would hope that customer complaints about airports where the system is abused should cause some changes. I'm actually pretty comfortable about flying (although I'm lucky to be able to take Amtrak to NY and DC and avoid the zealous at those airports and the no-bathroom policies above DC).

Right now, I'm way more worried about being in giant mall at Christmas or a big casino (if I gambled), which is where I think would be the next logical target.

[tx_dem41]

14. In every airport I have traveled through....

they do have a private area. I haven't been through Fargo, but I have never seen a female passenger getting "patted down".

So you do, in light of the 2 airplane bombings in Russia within the last 2-3 months, accept that pat downs might be necessary, given current technology?

[peacebird]

32. no

in fact i don't. IF all luggage were being screened, and everything going into the cargo bay were screened i might have more patience with this public groping. as it is - this is just another thuggish attempt to make it LOOK like they are taking steps to protect us.

have you traveled by train recently? I have. There were fresh gang paint tags all along the route from DC to NYC. NO SECURITY. Keep in mind - we have trains carrying hazardous materials traveling that corridor every day. NO SECURITY to the tracks. NONE.

As for letting some twit force women to pull their shirts up, exposing their bras, and then get felt down in public by a stranger. No. Inexcusable. Absolutely ridiculous.

you think a terrorist can't simply stuff the explosive up their wazoo? or are you proposing internal body cavity searches next?

[tx_dem41]

38. No, if you read between the lines....

I am proposing advancement in technology that would be able to detect explosives anywhere on you without invasive technologies. As I said to someone else, you seem to want to weaken one area of security (passenger searches) until ALL areas are somehow equal in effectiveness. That's a nice thought, but it would seem to expose you to carried-on bombs in the process.

I am saying that presently, these searches are necessary, unfortunately. And they are not public groping. They are done in private areas and not by men. And, by the way, I think that men probably need to be searched better as well.

And finally, if they can stick explosives in a shoe, they can stick them in a "wazoo".

[UpInArms]

40. I don't care if it's a man or woman groping me

and, public or private, I am not going to stand for someone thinking they have the ability to grab my body - it merely supports the intrusive and invasive police state.

[tx_dem41]

42. Then I respectfully say,

Don't fly.

I am sensitive to the groping comment. And, as a male, I admit I am most likely limited in that sensitivity. I just don't know what the alternative is for TSA employees working the security check points this very morning.

[UpInArms]

46. if you recall my first post on this subject - I said "I no longer

will fly".

That is my response and that will be my response until all of the proper security issues are dealt with in a proper fashion.

I am not going to allow some freak to get their jollies by feeling me up and humiliating me while shit that could cause a real problem is overlooked and ignored.

If they want to address all of the security issues, then perhaps I might agree to let someone touch me inappropriately (and let me tell you that when you give some people police power over your body, they take advantage of it and with this crap there appears to be no recourse) but I wouldn't bank on it if I were you.

This country is definitely going to hell in a handbasket and I am at least going to resist in my own pacifist manner.

I don't have to support the airlines and the goons and I'm not going to.

[tx_dem41]

48. And more power to you....and I mean that sincerely

Its not an option for everyone. And, as you recall from an earlier post, I agree that it is insane that there are obvious weak points in the current security policy.

I apologize if I appeared disrespectful, or flippant (or both) in my "Don't fly" comment.

[genieroze]

53. How would you feel

if a guard or whatever they are asked you to drop your pants and then squeezed your testicles in front of everybody. When you go into a public building and metal detectors go off they ask you to keep on going through and remove items until you stop setting it off. If that fails they use the wand to see what area is causing the problem. If it's a private area they politely take you into another room with a same sex guard and try to figure out what the problem is. I'm using this example because I don't fly, I get sick. I do live in the county seat and on high alert days they do have detectors, even for the public works. I have gone through many detectors since 9/11 and other then being time consuming are not a problem. Did you know you can set those detectors sensitivity levels? It sounds to me that TSA are practicing to be brown shirts. They need a lesson in etiquette and sensitivity training. Instead they use Gestapo tactics and get off on harassing people. Bombs can't always be detected by metal detectors anyway. I understand they need to do their job it's just they way they go about it that needs to be fixed.

[tx_dem41]

54. You need to need the articles abou this more carefully....

The policy of TSA is to do this in a private area, by a woman, with the back of their hand. And, if you read my other posts, I agree that men should be put through similar inspections.

But what I really believe is that the technology needs to be improved to make in non-invasive.

[genieroze]

59. I have heard of them doing this in public.

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?section=Opinion&OID=64391
I also think it's being felt up, that's more humiliating. They should ONLY do that if the wand shows something at the chest area. That's why when I need to go through a metal detector I don't wear a bra or I wear a tub top bra without any metal hooks. I thought they were going to get bomb detectors that you only need to walk through. Maybe if we weren't so busy wasting money in Iraq we could afford better non intrusive security here.

[MADem]

76. No, it isn't

The policy is to do it in a segregated area, in full view of all the other passengers. The "privacy" you get is a plexiglass separator. You are separated from your bags, your shoes, your wallet, your expensive laptop. It is hard to keep an eye on this shit while they are telling you to put your bare feet on a scruffy mat with footprints drawn on it. It is a horrible, demeaning experience.

Most people are too stunned to make any "demands" for a private location. Most don't.

I'm screened 100 percent of the time I fly. It doesn't matter how long it has been between ticket purchase and flight, payment by credit card, check, cash, or government agency, one way or round trip--I've done it all. I am on "THE LIST."

I guess I am in good company--me and Ted Kennedy, Enemies of the State.

[tx_dem41]

83. I agree...that the implementation of the policy as you describe...

...is wrong.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

115. I was groped (patted down) in a very public area at O'Hare

two months ago. It was between the lines where people pick up their luggage after it's scanned. I was made to stand in two footprints on the floor and patted down, (crotch and breasts) as well as wanded. This was by a female, but it didn't make it any less humiliating. She did use the palms of her hands and she also thrust her hands in the front pockets of my jeans.

All this while people streamed by...there was no private area that I could see.

I vowed to fly as little as possible after that. I wish I could say never, but I do have some travel plans in spring. MKJ

edited to add more sordid details...

[MadHound]

60. The thing is friend, the tech for non intrusive, non invasive searches

Already exists. If the airlines would spend the money to buy the tech, there wouldn't have to be a pat down search ever again, excepting special circumstances. Yet the airlines don't want to make the investment in the tech, TSA and Homeland Security aren't going to do it, so everybody involved goes with the the short term quick fix of intrusive searches. And the sad thing is that the airlines would be saving money in the long term, but instead, they are only interested in short term profits.

I refuse to fly because of this insanity. It is only desensitizing people, both security personell and the general public for the inevitable time when such intrusive searches are routine for every public and private building, or even in your own home.

[tx_dem41]

62. All good points. I also remember many

privacy groups went cuckoo over the new technology seeing thru clothing....sigh.

[MadHound]

66. Oh, I can understand people going crazy over the see through tech

But there are other, much more discreet forms of tech out there that won't be intrusive, won't see through, yet will do the job as well as, if not better than the pat down method now being applied. Electronic sniffers, trace dectectors, etc. It is just that the price floors the airlines at first glance, and they then fail to realize that it will save them time and money in the long run. A hand held explosives detector runs about $24,0000, and they multiply this by the number of security personell they have, and never recover from the sticker shock. Short term thinking, sad to say, and it will probably be short term thinking that is the death of us all.

[MADem]

84. You are quite right

They use sniffer technology all the time in crowd situations, they use radiological detectors, too. They are very portable and unobtrusive. There's also that charming body scanner that shows ya nekkid using low level x ray technology. They CAN do it without pawing you....the reason they paw us is to turn us into sheep.

Amazing how they come up with the cash to perpetuate a war for oil but they can't cough up the dough for this technology to keep us safe here at home.

BOW. Submit! OBEY!!!!

[tblue37]

109. The airlines

also lose a lot of money because so many people have decided either not to fly at all, or to fly only when absolutely necessary. Passengers are airlines' customers. Imagine how often you would go to the store if you were groped everytime you wanted to buy something. They should spend the money for the technology.

[amazona]

119. flights are full

I don't think the airlines are going broke because people don't fly. Airlines are going broke because of fuel cost or, perhaps, because they really aren't a profitable industry without federal support. Travel is pretty much back up to pre-911 levels but with less aircraft so flights are always pretty full.

Delta AIrlines just announced that they lose $23 for every seat they sell. I've told the joke before but apparently they expect to make it up in volume.

Seriously, airlines don't have the money to spend so you are talking about taxpayer investment for these devices.

[dkofos]

121. It's been over three years.

The technology excists now to detect explosives.
This should have been in place long ago.
I happen to think airport security is a joke.
I fly for free and not very often.

[alarimer]

70. I would not trust them in private

At least inpublic the violations are seen by everyone. In private who knows what they would do. I do not trust these rent-a-cops one bit. FUCK the TSA

[tx_dem41]

Well, I guess its damned if you do and damned if you don't

What system of passenger screening would you propose? Any?

[Justitia]

72. Read my post # 69 - DFW airport, NOT PRIVATE

I see from your profile you are in Dallas. If you travel much, I assume you leave from DFW on occasion. I travel thru there frequently. These were done out in the open, with literally hundreds of people watching. Also done with both hands on the women's bodies at the same time, using their PALMS, NOT the backs of their hands.

[tx_dem41]

75. Then you have a viable issue to complain about.

What has happened since you made your formal complaint to TSA?

[Justitia]

79. Thanks for the smartass response.

I was trying to let you know about the REALITY of the feel-ups at your very own airport and you give me the smartass response.

As I said, it happened this weekend, I was an observer, I gave you the facts.

But, you're a guy, who cares right?

[tx_dem41]

81. I apologize if you thought my answer was flippant.

I agreed that you have every reason to complain. And it should be acted on by the TSA. But, you need to make a formal complaint. That is all I meant by it. Believe me, when I hear about your case, I will be right there arguing that corrections need to be made, and restitution in some form should me made.

Never in this thread, have I defended the actions that you have described. They are wrong.

[amazona]

118. i've seen it but you can request a private area

I have actually seen women (and men) being patted down but, on request, you can go to the private area. I did not request because it didn't seem necessary for a patdown over clothes. What is the big deal? I just want to expedite and clear up any confusion.

It does seem some of the people most opposed to patdowns in this thread haven't experienced them. I think some of the news reports have been a bit overblown on this topic.

I don't like it that mass media is trying to discourage search of women. What or who is behind this? Just stupidity or tinfoil hat time? In the summer of 2001, mass media was complaining about aircraft not departing on time in sufficient number of cases. Instead of pressing for on time departures, we should have been pressing for better screening.

[KansDem]

93. I flew to Zurich via Munich 20 years ago...

I was patted down by a German guard at the Munich airport. There was a booth with curtains for the women...

[UpInArms]

15. how about I tell you a story first

in 1991 at Logan Airport (the very same airport that Flight 175 left from), my better half was flying to see me in Austin - he had a ticket on an American flight but saw a better connection flight on the screen - he couldn't find anyone to talk to about changing flights, so he just got on the flight that he preferred - no one even checked him out.

When he got to Austin, he was fairly disturbed by the absolute lack of concern.

I flew almost daily for close to 10 years - for business - and I've used all my chips up.

The cargo hold is still not checked - postal and shipping boxes get put on those planes without any screening.

Think about what is really necessary here:

Making certain who is on the flights - metal detection - making certain guns are not carried on - box cutters are also not such a good idea.

That old woman that had the gun in a book - where did she keep that book- was in it her panties or her bra?

Get a grip folks - being physically mauled while the shit gets put in the cargo hold without a glance?

Huh-uh.

[tx_dem41]

17. I agree with the comments about the cargo hold security, but....

you seem to be saying, that since they don't do proper security on the cargo hold, then they shouldn't do proper security in the passenger area. Do I have that right?

[UpInArms]

19. that is not what I said at all

What I said was:

The problems at Logan had been obvious for YEARS!

The other part that I said was: INSPECT THE CARGO!

I will not fly until proper safety measures are put in place and that means that proper identification of passengers must be made - groping people is not on that list - screening is.

Screening for chemicals is a good idea - but you don't have to do full body searches to do that.

Why should I allow some moron to feel me up as the bomb gets loaded in the cargo hold?

Will that make me a "safe" flyer?

[tx_dem41]

20. Is there current available technology to do the chemical searches

and is it feasible to be in place in every airport in this country?

Again, you seem to be sacrificing the passenger screening for the cargo security, when you say,

"Why should I allow some moron to feel me up as the bomb gets loaded in the cargo hold?

Will that make me a "safe" flyer?"

Getting past the emotion, you seem to be saying, "why should the TSA conduct adequate searches on passengers (given the technology they have), when the bombs get loaded in the cargo hold." Well, I'm sure the couple of hundred people that died in the two crashes in Russia recently, would have liked for adequate searches on passengers be performed. The bombs were brought on board by two Chechnyan women, in their bras. They didn't use the cargo hold.

[UpInArms]

22. how can you be so certain of those

"facts"?

Well, I'm sure the couple of hundred people that died in the two crashes in Russia recently, would have liked for adequate searches on passengers be performed. The bombs were brought on board by two Chechnyan women, in their bras. They didn't use the cargo hold.

Just because that is what you were "told" doesn't make it true.

Yes, there are suicide bombers and obviously there was something that took those planes down in Russia - but that's like the FBI telling us exactly "who" those 19 hijackers were within 24 hours - yet some of those named are still walking around alive.

[tx_dem41]

24. If you agree that there are suicide bombers (your words),

and avoiding the tinhat stuff for the moment, what do you do about passenger security.....TODAY.

[UpInArms]

26. start screening the cargo ............ n/t

[tx_dem41]

27. and what about the passengers....what do you do TODAY? n/t

[UpInArms]

29. I have been very clear -

passenger screening should not cease - but be controlled and limited -
using gestapo agression and body searches is not appropriate.

What have they found by searching in this manner?

It is not an effective means - it only deters legitimate travelers - and offends honest people.

They can take my shoes, test my fingers for residue, empty my pockets, look through my purse - but leave my tits and ass alone, thank you.

[Puglover]

67. Where do you get "gestapo" tactics?

I work for a major airline and fly all the time. And no I'm not a crew member. I've never seen anything like this. Annoying yes, "gestapo aggression" ? Sorry but that's hyperbole.

[MADem]

88. I have a relative who is a flight attendant

...and who is frequently subjected to the "gestapo tactics." I often wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that she is a very attractive young lady.

[0007]

91. ....and you can speak for all of the insanity that goes on?

[thinkingwoman]

34. actually, what I read

is that it is "suspected" that the Chechnyan women brought the bombs on board in their bras.

Evidence?

Here's something I "suspect"...I "suspect" that the people who hijacked four US planes on 9/11 were MEN and that even more specifically were men of Middle Easter origin, and...wait for it...the majority were from Saudi Arabia.

Oh, wait, those are facts. Nevermind.

[tx_dem41]

35. I have no idea what that has to do with the matter at hand.

If you believe that this is a gender thing, then you will make yourself susceptible to terrorism. Do you believe that profiling should be based on gender because of the one incident (9/11)? I don't believe in profiling at all, because it makes you weak. I would grant you that men should be more closely examined as women seem to be. The one thing that is needed to resolve all this is better (and less hands-on) technology at the check points. But, until that happens, I don't know what an alternative is to the present policy.

[thinkingwoman]

43. it has everything to do with the post

I responded to.

Assertions that pat downs (er, sorry, sexual assaults) of women in airports is a necessary evil because Chechnyan women put bombs in their bras are nonsense.

1. Show me the evidence that bombs were in those bras.

2. Patting down American women because of that "suspician" IS profiling which, as you point out, "makes you weak."

That's why I oppose the pat downs and the mealy mouthed "we need to do this to keep us safe" excuse.

[tx_dem41]

47. What DO we need to make us safe then?

Would it make you feel better, if I amended my statement and said that EVERY passenger needs to be more thoroughly checked because of the Russian bombings. That is a more correct statement of how I feel.

The checking of shoes is a prime example of a deficiency that was resolved, unfortunately through example. I flew about every week for the three months after 9/11 (after the first week of course). The security was haphazard, but, consistently deficient in checking my shoes. My shoes, with metal tips, would set alarms off, but the security officials just seemed to assume they were metal tips. Now, in my opinion, that was an insane assumption for them to make.

A few months later, Mr. Reid proved me correct.

[thinkingwoman]

104. we need to stop reacting

to the past and prepare for future attacks.

We need do reasonable screenings of passengers and begin to really screen cargo and people with daily access to planes who aren't flying.

We need to strengthen our borders and control who is entering this country.

We need to address the blaring security nightmare at our ports where we screen pretty much nothing that comes in.

We need to ask for advice from others who have been successfully keeping their planes safe--like Israel, frankly.

[tx_dem41]

113. All good points.

Especially the point about safety at ports. The current Administration has been criminally negligent on this one.

[BBG]

112. what we need to make us safe...

is to quit futzing around in other people's affairs and being the ugly american.

In the meantime this facade of security searches is nothing more than simply that, a facade. A fiction. A play in paranoia in pat downs and breast checks.

We give up our self-respect to the humiliation of offensive searches in order to gather some semblence of security. And it makes me angry.

I would prefer to fly dangerously without the intrusive and insulting search and say so most every time I fly. And that muttering simpleton in line with me who always says it makes them feel safer is always sure to hear my derision and ridicule to think that any of this crap makes them safer.

Criminey, I'm still a week away from a pre-holiday flight back east and already I'm getting cranked up.
:|

[tx_dem41]

114. Good luck!

:-)

[DoNotRefill]

39. Ummm...

I'm pretty sure a visual inspection would turn up the explosives without having to touch the women. If they think there might be a problem, why not have a female officer go into a private room with the woman, and have her lift her shirt? It's not like you wouldn't be able to see the explosives hidden in the bras.

I always pinged the chemical explosives detectors, and got hassled unmercifully at airports. The reason why? Because before I'd go on a trip, I'd always feed and water my plants, and the plant food is nitrogen based. Consequently, I don't fly any more. If they treat me like a criminal, why should I give them ONE FUCKING DIME of my money?

[tx_dem41]

44. Well, if you read articles on it, and talk to travelers...

They do go to as private areas as possible and use the back of their hands. Is that an ideal situation? No. If private rooms could be set aside, I am all for doing that. Should men have to be subject to the same level of inspection? OF COURSE.

At the moment, what alternative does the TSA have?

[DoNotRefill]

68. It's not necessary to touch even with the back of the hand....

if you can simply do a visual inspection.

[Justitia]

69. Correction (includes your airport - DFW)

I fly a lot and am female. I have been reading / listening to reports of these "feel up" searches with interest. This weekend I traveled through 3 airports and watched security procedures with renewed scrutiny.

The DFW airport was the worst - they conducted at least FIVE invasive feel-ups in the 20 mins I watched at only ONE security entrance (DFW has many security entrances). These feel-ups were done in FULL VIEW of everyone both in line and in the main terminal. For those who have not been thru DFW, it is set up in a spoke fashion so there are literally hundreds of travelers walking by security points at any given moment. In fact, when a woman (no men were selected in the 20 mins I observed) was selected to be felt up, she was taken directly to the CENTER of the security set up, making her a visual focal point.

They WERE NOT done with the back of the hand, but by full hand contact (with both hands at same time) on the upper torso. Women were felt all around the breast (bypassing center breast tissue and the nipple) and BETWEEN the breasts. It was very similar to breast exams I've had, if you left off about 2 inches of breast tissue radiating outward from the nipple. All were performed by women.

I must say, aside from having a complete stranger put their hands all over your upper body, the worst parts were having literally hundreds of people watching this scene (myself included) and being treated like an arrested criminal. One woman was traveling with her two young children (definitely both under 8 yrs old), who sat and watched this being done to their mother.

I made my husband watch with me (he flies every week) and even he was disgusted by the procedure. Humiliating!

Happily, no feel-ups at Houston or Tampa (where I expected it most).

[tx_dem41]

77. You have every right to make a formal complaint.

Let's hope you did.

[Justitia]

82. Nice response. Won't happen to you, so who cares huh?

As I said, I was an observer of these feel-ups at YOUR airport and you give me some flip response - gee thanks.

As far as women actually subjected to these feel-ups filing a complaint - get real buddy. Firstly, I would guess the vast majority of these women have no idea they can even file a complaint, and if they did, would they want to have their names logged on to every federal watch list imaginable?

These women just wanted to see their families for Thanksgiving and were subjected to some of the worst humilitation I have seen in public, compliments of the gov't, in your own town.

Thanks for the thoughtful response. :grr:

[tx_dem41]

86. I stated that you have every right to complain...which means

I agree, those actions are wrong! But things only get changed, if people complain. Don't you agree with that?

[DELUSIONAL]

110. Hiding Breast Bombs: by MAUREEN DOWD

Women are pissed about being handled by a stranger IN PUBLIC -- but many women are afraid of complaining for fear of being mistreated every time as punishment for complaining. Sort of like women being fearful of reporting rape -- because the system will re-rape her in the process of bringing her attacker to justice if they find the bastard.
D.

Snips of Dowd's column below plus the link. . . . .

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/25/opinion/25dowd.html?oref=login&oref=login&hp


On the Road: Getting Familiar With All-Too-Intimate Pat-Downs (November 9, 2004) Many Women Say Airport Pat-Downs Are a Humiliation (November 23, 2004)

It always makes me feel slimy and humiliated, as though I'm in one of those cheesy women-in-prison movies, with titles like "Caged," "Slammer Girls" or "Reform School Girls."

First you have to strip, unzipping your boots, unbuckling your belt and unbuttoning your suit jacket while any guys standing around watch. Then you have to walk around in some flimsy top and stocking or bare feet. Then you have to assume the spread-eagled position. Then a beefy female security agent runs her hands all the way around your breasts, in between, underneath - again with guys standing around staring.

Flying on business, I've gone through this embarrassing tableau two dozen times in airports all over the country in the last couple of months. I've been searched more than Martha Stewart. I watched a Transportation Security Administration screener brusquely insist that my friend take off her blazer even though she had on only lingerie underneath - a see-through camisole - and the man behind her was leering.

[Cheswick2.0]

55. you know, you are just being argumentative....stop and think for a minute

The security measure they are enacting are a mask. They mask the fact that the real security measures that should be taken are not being taken. To make everyone feel safe they are putting on a show. WOW...woman being exploited for show, what a concept. They have NO intention of spending the money to do what really needs to be done. That is the problem. AS long as we continue to be a part of that show, they will never make flight safe.

Feeling around women's breasts is humiliating and degrading. We might not mind so much if it was actually making flights safer... it is not. Do they feel around your testicals? Couldn't you be hiding plastic explosives there? So how come they aren't keeping me safe by feeling around in your crotch?

Frankly, your attitude betrays a level of sexism that I doubt you even know exists in yourself.

[tx_dem41]

56. Why don't you read my posts before you speak....

I have already stated that men should go through similar inspections.

Nice try, though.

[Cheswick2.0]

73. I did read your posts

men don't have breasts.

[tx_dem41]

78. And men have their own...

private areas too. You will give me that, right?

[UpInArms]

21. here's a link to the Gore Commission's Report

http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/212fin~1.html

but the airline industry and the GOP resisted any and all implementation of security measures because it would "cost" too much.

Wonder if they still feel that way?

How much has it "cost" now?

Let's just do a short list:

9/11
2800 lives that day
bankrupt airlines
tens of thousands of jobs
Afghanistan war
Iraq war (based on lies about SH and 9/11)
hundreds of thousands of lives
hundreds of billions of dollars
$2 trillion in debt added to national debt (yes, there are other factors involved there, too)

This is what you get when you have an administration with no foresight or vision or relationship with reality.

But you know what's really important?

GAWD, GUNS AND GAYS!

FEBRUARY 12, 1997

Recommendations

3.1. The federal government should consider aviation security as a national security issue, and provide substantial funding for capital improvements.

The Commission believes that terrorist attacks on civil aviation are directed at the United States, and that there should be an ongoing federal commitment to reducing the threats that they pose. In its initial report, the Commission called for approximately $160 million in federal funds for capital costs associated with improving security, and Congress agreed. As part of its ongoing commitment, the federal government should devote significant resources, of approximately $100 million annually, to meet capital requirements identified by airport consortia and the FAA. The Commission recognizes that more is needed. The Commission expects the National Civil Aviation Review Commission to consider a variety of options for additional user fees that could be used to pay for security measures including, among others, an aviation user security surcharge, the imposition of local security fees, tax incentives and other means.

3.2. The FAA should establish federally mandated standards for security enhancements.

These enhancements should include standards for use of Explosive Detection System (EDS) machines, training programs for security personnel, use of automated bag match technology, development of profiling programs (manual and automated), and deployment of explosive detection canine teams.

3.3. The Postal Service should advise customers that all packages weighing over 16 ounces will be subject to examination for explosives and other threat objects in order to move by air.

The Postal Service now requires that packages weighing over 16 ounces must be brought to a post office, rather than be placed in a mailbox. To improve security further, the Postal Service should mandate that all mail weighing over 16 ounces contain a written release that allows it to be examined by explosive detection systems in order to be shipped by air. The Postal Service should develop and implement procedures to randomly screen such packages for explosives and other threat objects. If necessary, the Postal Service should seek appropriate legislation to accomplish this.

3.4. Current law should be amended to clarify the U.S. Customs Service's authority to search outbound international mail.

Currently, the Customs Service searches for explosives and other threat objects on inbound mail and cargo. This recommended legislative enhancement parallels the Customs Service's existing border search authority.

3.5. The FAA should implement a comprehensive plan to address the threat of explosives and other threat objects in cargo and work with industry to develop new initiatives in this area.

The FAA should place greater emphasis on the work of teams, such as the Aviation Security Advisory Committee and the Baseline Cargo Working Group, to address cargo issues. The Commission believes that the FAA should implement the Baseline Group's recommendation with regard to profiling by "known" and "unknown" shippers. In addition, unaccompanied express shipments on commercial passenger aircraft should be subject to examination by explosives detection systems; the FAA should work with industry to develop a computer assisted cargo profiling system that can be integrated into airlines' and forwarders' reservation and operating systems; requirements should be implemented requiring that trucks delivering cargo for loading on planes be sealed and locked; the FAA should develop and distribute air cargo security training materials; and enhanced forwarder and shipper employee screening procedures should be developed.

...more...

[tx_dem41]

23. On this matter, we agree completely. n/t

[UpInArms]

25. glad to hear it

:thumbsup:

I am not saying that nothing needs to be done - but they are not addressing the key factors at all.

Treating "symptoms" that are not the root cause of problems does very little to resolve anything.

[tx_dem41]

28. Again we agree

But, I feel that both areas (cargo/passengers) needs to be attacked. Its frustrating that you feel one area needs to be emphasized at the sacrifice of the other (which I know is not what you actually said...but its the way it would play out).

[tinanator]

36. proper security?

They arent doing proper security, so how can you support what they are doing? The fact that there hasnt been a major act of terrorism in the US since 9-11-01 despite an absolute lack of "proper" security puts the lie to the threat. Anthrax killer, anyone? Osama? They arent interested in terrorists, only terror.

[tx_dem41]

41. 3 years of no attacks == Safety?

I don't think so. Did you feel that way in 1996, three years after terrorists bombed the WTC? Well, guess what, you would have been wrong! President Clinton didn't feel that we were safe then, so why should you?

And by the way, I am not naive enough to believe that the present Administration's motives are pure in this area AT ALL. But, I am also not naive enough to believe that a stringent security policy is not necessary. It seems that neither side (Lib/Con or Dem/Rep) wants to do it though.

[tinanator]

45. ya know

in 96 I became a victim of terrorism. Im also a security expert of sorts, so even if you dont want to listen to what Im saying, please dont bother attempting to guess what Im thinking or feeling.

[tx_dem41]

49. I was responding to your statement that read....

"The fact that there hasn't been a major act of terrorism in the US since 9-11-01 despite an absolute lack of "proper" security puts the lie to the threat."

But, I apologize if I offended. I guess its easy to assume on these boards. I'm learning.

[tinanator]

51. extrapolate from reality and their propaganda

If Al-Qaeda were a real threat, do you really think they would have been foiled in any way shape or form over the last three years? Do you think they need you or me to tell them how to strike simple and effective blows for terror in the US? If they were what the Bushcorp maladmin and fascist media have claimed they are, they would have done any number of heinous acts with impunity by now. The actual culprits of prior terror acts during the Bush reign of terror have been left to roam free, and that is the bottom line.

[tx_dem41]

52. I wouldn't know...

I don't read the "fascist media". Why would you? Strange.

[leesa]

64. Did you know that you can stop terrorism by not invading countries, not

overthrowing elected governments (Haiti, Venezuela and a cast of thousands) and by not stealing other countries resources Iraq + many others)??

You can throw all the stupid guards at thei that you want, it will make little difference. Bush and his band of thugs know this, that's why they don't fund any of their security programs. Also, if they choose to pull off another 9-11, BushCo would rather not have the possibility of disloyal peering eyes.

[Jack_DeLeon]

12. The Airport Gestapo probably deserved it...

hell they probably deserve worse.

[tx_dem41]

18. Since you feel airport security is not right currently.....

....what type of system do you propose?

[tinanator]

37. secured cockpits

simple enough to have done before 9-11-01. There is surely a reason why that wasnt done, if only at the governements expense? Airport security is a hoax, yet you stand in favor? Strange.

[tx_dem41]

50. Where have I stood in favor of the entire system?

If you peruse the entire thread, I have been critical of at least too areas: Cargo security and lack of better screening technology (and the latter is causing the complaints in this thread). But, I do acknowledge that a stringent level of security is needed.

And you bring up a third level of weakness. Cockpit security. That is another definite problem we both acknowledge.

But, I am also worried about bombs being carried on board and detonated without any prior behavior tipping anyone off.

[BiggJawn]

31. And I wish they'd clean their carpets!

My socks are clean. Well, at least they are before I go to the airport...

Sometimes I feel like showing up in a Speedo and flip-flops...

And lemme tell ya, that's NOT a pretty sight!.

[goddess40]

57. I would love to see someone show up at the airport like that

I would be worth the long wait in line to see the faces of the fascists at the check points.

[MADem]

80. Or a BATHROBE AND SLIPPERS

It would be especially nice if it was a group....the flabbier, fleshier and happily age-spotted, the better. Matching bath turbans would finish the outfits nicely!!!!!

[fortyfeetunder]

106. Oh, why not go for the full monty?

Like if TSA is going to do a T&A feelie show, might as well bare all. The only device I may have is the gas I pass when they rub my belly...

[BiggJawn]

108. "Whoa!...Uh, like, uhhhhh.....Like, uh...Did I SCORE????"

[flying_blind]

33. Jail the president and his MIHOP friends and let me fly n/t

[leesa]

63. I felt like slapping one last time I flew. EXTREMELY rude, grabbing things

out of my hands without asking for them first, basically treating me like a criminal. I said "That was extremely rude" and she put on her best angelic Fundie face on and said "try to spread some love in there (the plane, I guess)", as though I had been the one with the rude behavior.

Flying has become awful, but I'll bet they don't want flying to be for the commoners anymore.

[colonel odis]

65. the wholee airport security racket is a joke.

one smelly nut has firecrackers in his shoe, so in order to look tough the tsa has us all taking off our shoes.

19 saudi terrorists with box cutters drop four planes and suddenly people who couldn't get hired at mcdonald's are going through our wallets and sticking their hands down our pants.

if the terrorists had wanted to hit us again, they would have. and if they ever decide to again, they will. nothing will stop them. certainly nothing the bush administration had the brains or balls to do.

it's in this administration's best interest to keep us in a mild state of fear. to make us feel like they're our protector and benefactor. putting restrictions on our ability to move about freely and instituting peeks into our private lives keeps us under their thumbs.

this woman should have cleaned the guard's clock. however, for slapping the guard with a ticket she'll probably be barred from flying ever again.

and 60 million people approved of this treatment by voting for bush.

[LibDemAlways]

94. Yours is the best post of this thread.

As a middle aged woman who get felt up because the metal detector was set off by surgical screws in my ankle from an old injury, I can attest to the utter stupidity and uselessness of the TSA. While I was being publically humiliated by the Sea-tac gestapo, I watched a 90 year old hunched over woman having her shoes removed and being hoisted out of her wheelchair. Last week the LA Times ran an article very sympathetic to the screeners that was accompanied by a photo of a screener patting down a 4-year-old boy and his grandma.

It's all a sick joke. A determined terrorist doesn't have to bring anything aboard a plane to create mayhem. The airlines themselves provide plenty of potential terror tools. And my husband, who flies every week, sees plenty of cockpit door opening and closing as the pilots emerge to use the bathroom. Must be all that coffee the flight attendants are constantly opening the door to bring them.

[tx_dem41]

95. So please propose

a comprehensive security policy that secures all areas.

[colonel odis]

97. what wasn't working pre-9/11? a bunch of guys with box cutters

got on planes. was that a breakdown in the whole security system? or was it a breakdown on one particular tuesday morning?

[tx_dem41]

98. One particular morning at different airports at different checkpoints.

So a few guys were having a bad day? What I saw on the videos they released a few months ago was about standard operating procedures for airport passenger screening in pre-9/11 days.

The people who used to work checkpoints were incredibly lax and unprofessional and there was very little the Government could do to control or police their behavior/performance. I think most "very frequent" flyers would state that the TSA has done a better job at passenger screening than the private companies.

[colonel odis]

120. perhaps i'm not in your "very frequent" flyer category. i've only flown a

dozen or so times since last february.

i still think it's an unnecessary mess, the purpose of which is to create fear, impede the ability to travel freely, and make us look at the federal govt as our daddy/protector.

[LostinVA]

99. Look at Germany

I've been reading this thread on and off all day, and I am seriously getting tired of the contrarian answers. Feeling up women publicly in an airport is not only creepy, but does NOTHING to improve the security in our airports. The lack of courtesy and professionalism is appalling, and glaring when compared to other countries.

Where does Germany fit into all of this??? I traveled to Germany recently, and flew back home to the US via Frankfurt. I can't remember the whole procedure, but here goes: we checked in at a pre-ticket counter desk and presented our credentials. Again at the counter, a bit more closely. Right before the main terminal, we passed through a huge, heavily guarded security area. I "beeped," and a polite female PROFESSIONAL pulled me aside, politely asked me to stand with my arms spread and my legs slighted spread. I did and she wanded me. The front rivets of my jeans beeped. She said she was going to have to touch the front of my pants, I said okay, she smiled and thanked me. No problem. I observed people being culled out from the crowd and taken into PRIVATE rooms. There was another checkpoint where we were scanned and had our credentials looked at. Then, AGAIN at our gate. We couldn't leave the area after this. All of the security personnel were polite and professional. And, time from when I first walked into the airport to reaching my gate was about 40 minutes.

I landed in Philly, to chaos and rudeness. "security" people smacking gum, chatting, rudely grabbing my 86-year-old grandfather, while ignoring the xray screen. Unbelievable.

Sorry for the length, but my proposal, Tex Dem, is to have professionals do it professional. Easy as that. But oh! That costs MONEY, huh??? Hahhhaha. That'll never happen.... Other European airports I've been in have been just as good.

Sorry for the length!

[tx_dem41]

100. No problem about the length

I don't mean to come across as a contrarian, but my experiences have been contrary to many others on this thread, so it comes naturally on this one. Sorry.

I guess, I have been lucky, because your experience that you describe in Germany is about the experience I have going through the domestic airports I have travelled in. That doesn't mean that I would tolerate or approve of the behavior that you (and others) describe. I would urge you to complain to the local airport authority, the TSA, and your congressman.

[LostinVA]

102. Complaining

No worries TexDem... it's just I guess you've been lucky, because I have had some horrible experiences at about ten different US airports, with Sea-Tac being the worst... by far!

Why do we not complain? Let me tell you what happened at Sea-Tac: after I was felt up publicly and complained about both the public aspect of it and the ROUGHNESS of it, I was told I'd better be quiet if I wanted to make my flight. Okay, I got her name and complained to the TSA via my Congressman. Guess what? I get flagged EVERY time I fly now. Nope, this isn't paranoia, it's the truth. It's crazy. So, I'll just keep my mouth shut until something REALLY bad happens.

So, I'm not ragging on you. I'm just trying to say that the system is broken and needs to be fixed, because it is not keeping things secure, and is unfairly targeting people who are merely flying.

[tx_dem41]

103. Believe me, I'm getting that message. n/t

[colonel odis]

96. funny you should mention sea-tac. i had to go through extra screening

there back in august, and the guy who searched me was the nastiest, greasiest, most obese, frightening guy i've seen in a long time.

he was totally professional and courteous. but he was repulsive. and i don't say that lightly.

nice as hell airport you've got there, btw.

[Castilleja]

111. That is the most sensible post I have seen

in this whole thread.

[0007]

89. I bet that hurt worse than getting hit with a crow bar!

[clem_c_rock]

101. I think getting gropped is the last of our worries these days

when we're all getting reamed.

[arikara]

105. Well I think that there has to be some common sense used

with these people. My dad who has alzheimers kept setting off the alarm because he had one of those metal tins of candies in an inside pocket and nobody could find it. They were getting all testy with him which of course confused him even more.

[yorkiemommie1]

107. you know what ....

i'm middleaged, thick thighed and flatchested. i'll drop my drawers and lift up my tshirt and give 'em all a show at LAX. they wanna see old lady? HERE'S old lady!

when i flew last, i wore nothing w/ metal and rubber slippers ( the GOP has ruined the word flip*****). it was ok.

[amazona]

116. people, it just isn't worth it

She probably thought swatting at the supervisor with a boarding pass was a pretty harmless way to express her frustration but, people, it just isn't worth it.

This is going to end up costing her thousands if not tens of thousands.

Yes, I've been patted down. It can be annoying. But they are not trying to molest you. I am a fortysomething woman, and I would be just as annoyed if they automatically assumed that I was incapable of having a strong belief or taking strong action. If there is something unusual about my baggage or myself, I fully expect it to be checked out. If you set off the metal detector, for sure, it has to be checked out. What is so hard to understand about that? We all have the same goal -- a safe flight.

I grumbled just as much about the knife they overlooked and let through as about the pat-down. Maybe more. Sometimes the security folk just can't keep everyone happy.