Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I go through TSA on a regular basis for work.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 10:57 PM
Original message
I go through TSA on a regular basis for work.
Just for some background info, I'm officially a "trainer" for a call-center Tech support center for POS (point-of-sale) computers. The new-hire training can take up to 4 weeks, and I am also responsible for creating and maintaining the on-line reference material including training videos. However, since I have managed to streamline most of these functions I am also asked to help with doing actual customer installations of our POS systems. This means that between New Hire trainings (which are extremely important, but fairly rare) I spend 3-4 days a week traveling. In some cases, I have to fly directly from one location to another.

This means that I regularly go through TSA screening 2-3 times a week.

Full disclosure, I am about as White as you can get. But I always watch to see how everyone else is treated around me. Yes, I always go through the "expert traveler" line, but anyone who travels regularly can tell you that doesn't mean anything, and you end up merging with the "stupid travelers" anyway, so that's pretty much a misnomer.

Interesting side-note, when Bush was in office I was always pulled out for extra security. I used to joke that it was because of all the anti-Bush letters I had written, and I just added it to the "time to arrive early". My conservative aunt didn't believe it until we traveled together. Interestingly enough, once Obama was elected I was no longer "targeted".

Bottom line: I've been through TSA in more different cities than I can remember. Some have been friendlier than others. But they ALL have been very professional.

And, like I said before, I have watched others for some of the offenses that I keep reading about here that are supposed to be so rampant.

So, as a frequent subject of TSA scrutiny, please excuse me when I call BULLSHIT to TSA bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Dawson Leery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. Do you regulary have to go through the "porno-scanner"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. I leave from BNA, which uses the LH3 machine
which is not the X-Ray machine that raised so much controversy. But, they seem to use the LH-3 machine randomly whenever the regular line gets backed-up. I've also been through it in PHL and I remember somewhere else, although it was so quick and unintrusive I really don't remember where. So, yes, at least 5 times and probably more that I don't remember.

It was almost as quick as walking through the regular scanner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #1
87. I went through two weeks ago...
Non event... seriously.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
93. WTF with calling it a "porno-scanner"? People are fine with tweeting ones erect penis,
but a blurry image on a scanner is now porno.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #93
95. Because some people resort to inflammatory...
language to win "debates".

It's a version of "stacking the deck".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brickbat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
2. 150 flight experiences out of hundreds of millions per year isn't maybe the most rock-solid
Edited on Sun Jun-26-11 11:04 PM by Brickbat
of arguments. But, you know, it's a start, I suppose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
12. Granted, no. But the problem obviously is not as widespread
as some people claim it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brickbat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Wait, where do you get "obviously"?
Edited on Sun Jun-26-11 11:21 PM by Brickbat
.000001875 percent of passenger-flights surveyed by you doesn't hit "obvious" for me, so I'm wondering what other passenger-flights you're counting.

I might be missing a decimal place here or there in that number, just FYI.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #14
20. If you flew as much as I did, it would be obvious.
Considering the number of flights every single day, and the number of complaints.... I think you need to revise your numbers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bonobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:05 PM
Response to Original message
3. Translation: I've never had any trouble, so there's no problem. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KarenS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. +1 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
15. Translation, I kept hearing about "other people's problems"
but very little from personal experience. My personal experience is entirely different. What is your personal experience?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bonobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:44 PM
Response to Reply #15
32. My personal experience is that many TSA agents are polite and many are rude.
Edited on Sun Jun-26-11 11:44 PM by Bonobo
And that is as relevant to the larger issue as your experience --namely completely IRRELEVANT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #32
38. ok, so HOW is it Irrelevant?
TSA screens thousands of people a day. Once every six months or so we see some claim of impropriety. Frankly, given the odds, it's amazing we don't see more examples.

We have so many issues that we should be focusing on. When I see a distraction like the TSA, I'll admit that it makes me angry. It makes us look like lunatics. It hurts us as a movement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bonobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #38
41. It is irrelevant because it is not the good outcomes of these encounters
that matter with regards to the defense of civil liberties and human dignity, but the bad ones.

Failing to rise up and speak out against these cases -indeed telling of your own mild encounters with them as a way of trying to counter them - is ultimately a mistake because it misses the point that each time these occur to ANY of us, it diminishes us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #41
45. BUT, the "bad" outcome is not always as it is presented.
This may come as a surprise to many on DU, but there are people who will exaggerate their situation in order to gain sympathy.

I agree that in order to enjoy freedom, we must always be vigilant. But, part of that vigilance includes recognizing that some people will BS us in order to gain.

So, if we are to be truly vigilant, we must be vigilant against both sides of the argument and manipulation on BOTH sides. And this woman's side smells to high heaven.

As I said before, if it had been revealed how I had abused my mother, I'd be embarrassed, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bonobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 12:36 AM
Response to Reply #45
47. Again, the issue of whether this woman needed to change her grandma's diapers more frequently is...
so far off the issue.

However, the issue that a 95 year old American citizen on the last legs of her life was forced to remove show her diapers or remove them is the real issue.

Is this the kind of country you want to live in and have your children live in? THAT is the issue.

BTW, as a side note and totally unrelated (as were your comments about the mother), did it ever occur to you that the old lady pissed or shit herself BECAUSE she was forced to undergo this invasive pat down and bullying behavior?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dept of Beer Donating Member (957 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 01:41 AM
Response to Reply #47
58. If you have ever had to change anybody's diapers, a child's or a parent's,

then you would know the routines are never routine.

Yeah, TSA blew it, and will continue to blow it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
personman Donating Member (959 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #38
50. Checking old people's diapers makes us safer...think otherwise & you're a lunatic. nt
Edited on Mon Jun-27-11 01:05 AM by personman
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #38
86. "Once every six months or so we see some claim of impropriety."
:rofl:

You just tipped your hand, right there. Pull the other one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #86
88. How did the poster...
"tip (his) hand?

I love these secret litmus tests.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Union Scribe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 07:05 AM
Response to Reply #3
64. B-I-N-G-O
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:06 PM
Response to Original message
4. "stupid travelers" ?
Speaks volumes of your view of other people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demosincebirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #4
17. I guess that means any traveler who holds him up for more than a sec.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:31 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. Your "guess" would be wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #4
19. Well, let me share one experience
a guy in front of me had his bag examined and the TSA agent found a box-cutter with razor in his bag. His reply was "it's just a box-cutter", completely oblivious of the fact that box-cutters were the whole reason we were going through this in the first place! The TSA removed the razor, and let him keep the holder.

"It's just a box-cutter!" I'd call that stupid, wouldn't you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #19
28. You used that phrase in a specific way in your OP
contrasting against "expert travelers" and speaking about merging with the so-called "stupid travelers" anyway. That makes it sound like 2 lines, with you in the self-proclaimed "expert" one. Or were you talking about separate lines?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #28
42. Yes, there usually are 2 lines for the "expert traveler" and the "casual
traveler". But it's voluntary. The lanes are marked "expert" and "casual" but there is no extra screening for either. The "expert" lanes are basically for people who know to take their shoes off and take their laptops out of their cases without being told.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 01:06 AM
Response to Reply #42
53. So, you equate "casual" with "stupid"
Are people somehow pre-screened for their supposed expertise in knowing "to take their shoes off" in the "expert" line?

Or is there some other qualification?

Arrogance, perhaps?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 07:21 AM
Response to Reply #53
71. No, but I equate heading toward a metal detector wearing a ton of jewelry as "stupid"

I can never figure those folks out. Large belt buckles, wristwatch, pendant necklaces, large earrings, and a pocket full of change... and heading through there to learn, for the first time in their lives apparently, what things are made of metal.

Those same folks were there pre-9/11 too.

While "stupid" isn't a good word, it does get a little tedious to get caught behind a collection of folks who just can't seem to figure it out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blueamy66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #71
72. I used to wear belt buckles, necklaces, my good watch, etc.
when I flew from PHX to CLT to see my long distance love. I liked to look good when he saw me at the airport.

Sheesh, generalize much?

And yeah, I grew up in the airline industry. Probably know much more about it than most people. The TSA sux ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #72
73. And those things had to come off pre-9/11 too

So what's the big deal. There shouldn't be a metal detector either, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blueamy66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #73
91. What?
You make no sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #19
40. I used to fy all the time but haven't recently. The dimwit that packed a boxcutter in hi carryon
was STUPID! For god sake, either put it in your stowed baggage o buy the blades when you get to your destination! I have to agree with the OP, some flyers are just stupid!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProdigalJunkMail Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #19
96. most ridiculous part of their 'allowed' section
Tools (seven inches or less in length)
Screwdrivers (seven inches or less in length)

ALLOWED in carry on baggage...

Anyone who wants to can do SERIOUS damage with these items. With a seven inch screwdriver my 8 year old could kill someone...

Security theater at best...

sP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Speck Tater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:07 PM
Response to Original message
6. I'm sure you need no warning that anything that contradicts the party line will be ridiculed. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #6
16. What is your personal experience? Please share. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:08 PM
Response to Original message
7. Even as innocuous as you make this sound,
the coincidence that you were pulled out of line for extra screening until Obama was elected isn't all that innocuous. The possibility exists that people can be targeted for special treatment having little to do with national security.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #7
25. So you think the Bush Administration would punish dissenters...
By making them go through the porno scanner at the airport? What end would that serve? Furthermore, do you realize how much manpower it takes to identify everybody who has written something bad about the Bush administration?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #25
29. That wasn't my point.
But I'm glad you've been happy with your experiences.

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #7
43. I agree, but sometimes you have to choose your fights.
I endured the extra screening until it stopped, because I had hope it would stop.

If McCain was elected and the practice continued, that would have been a different matter entirely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Electric Monk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #43
44. You really think it is that political, and you also don't have a problem with that?
Just trying to clarify your stance on this, since you seem to have touched a nerve or two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Electric Monk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:10 PM
Response to Original message
8. This is a continuation of another thread?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

I haven't flown since the mid 90s, in case anyone was interested.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:11 PM
Response to Original message
9. Oh. Well, that's alright then. Glad you cleared that up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #9
22. I'm just saying, don't be so quick to judge. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. Heaven forfend that I ever judge you. Please do carry on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #24
31. Well, I am sorry if I interpreted your response as "sarcasm"
it's obvious now that you are not capable of sarcasm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:14 PM
Response to Original message
10. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
13. My SIL doesn't travel regularly. But she flew to NY
two weeks ago and on her way back was asked to go through the Naked Scanner. She was horrified, but when she was given the alternative, she felt she had no choice but to choose the Rapiscan. She said nothing, because she was so intimidated and so shocked that she was afraid to make a fuss in case there was some other horror awaiting her.

But when she got out of there she broke down in tears and told her family she was horrified and felt as if she had been virtually raped. I regret not warning her but I did not know she was going until she called me when she got back. She is not into politics so the subject never came up anyhow. She now says she will not fly again and I don't blame her. I won't be either until our Constitutional rights are restored.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #13
26. OK, this just reeks of BS.
The "Naked Scanner"? "She was so intimidated and so shocked"? She felt "virtually raped"?

See, this is why I call BULLSHIT.

OK, I suggest that everyone who believes this stops flying. If you believe this, Just don't fly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #26
51. I have stopped flying. Many people have stopped flying.
And don't call me a liar. My SIL was traumatized knowing that she had been put through a machine that given a choice she would never have gone throught and won't do so asgain. I spoke to her last week after she returned and I completely sympathize with her.

Do you call all the stories of the myriad of other passengers who have reported feeling the same way 'BS'? It IS virtual rape to many women and I'll thank you NOT to try to speak for women about whom you know nothing.

I could call your OP BS also since it doesn't correspond with the many and increasing reports from passengers across the country.

Children being touched by strangers when their parents teach them always never to allow that?? Even members of Congress from both parties have been appalled by the reports.

So, good for you that no stranger has 'touched' your little girl in an inappropriate way. Too bad you have so little empathy though for the many women and children, little boys also, who HAVE been traumatized by these abuses.

If anyone did to my little girl what was done to other children by TSA agents, I really don't think I could control myself. Which is why it is better for me not to fly right now, until our rights have been restored.

And with so many states preparing to do that, and a bill in Congress also, I am hopeful it will be sooner rther than later.

I can assure you that if the travelling public were having YOUR experiences rather than that of my SIL none of those bills would be necessary.

So I call BS on YOU for refusing to acknowedge a problem that 11 states so far and Congress HAVE acknowledged.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #51
82. "many and increasing reports from passengers across the country"
Edited on Mon Jun-27-11 02:53 PM by SDuderstadt
Except, 2M people fly everyday. Of those, @ 2 % are subjected to secondary screening every day. That's 40,000. passengers a day. That's 280,000 per week or slightly less than 15,000,000 per year.

The question everyone should be asking is why aren't we flooded with complaints, Sabrina. Your "mountain out of a molehill" tactics are not helping the debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 08:30 AM
Response to Reply #26
74. Not everyone enjoys having their personal "junk" viewed by complete strangers
much less handled. Just because you have no objection to it doesn't mean it won't offend the sensibilities of other people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #13
35. Why would she have been shocked? That they use scanners
and pat-downs isn't exactly news. Doesn't she own a TV or read the news on a computer? Wouldn't most people have decided which screening option they'd choose before they got to the airport?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:26 PM
Response to Original message
18. Oh, and btw, it was much safer to travel when Bush was president.
Lefties had managed to keep the Rapiscans out of our airports back then, and the 'Enhanced Patdowns' didn't exist until last Fall.

I never thought I'd say this, but traveling under Bush was a picnic even if you were singled out, compared to what it has become under this Admistration. IF anyone had told me I would ever have to say that, I would have laughed.

But no one's laughing anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #18
27. Since 2007 pre-Obama.
TSA began deploying state-of-the-art advanced imaging technology in 2007.

From TSA's site: http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/index.shtm

So lefties didn't manage it back then either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #18
34. Not in my experience. Under Bush I always had to undergo
extra security. I was always pulled out of line for additional screening. Perhaps it was because I had a common name, but I learned to allow extra time at the airport because it always happened. Until Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #34
46. Under Bush you didn't have to go through Naked Scanners or 'Enhanced Pat-downs'
This is what is causing the outrage. And no children were being 'touched' by strangers in uniforms or women having their blouses pulled down in public. Because the Enhanced Patdowns only began in November of last year.

So, no, there was nothing like this under Bush and if there had been there would not be one person on this board defending it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:56 PM
Response to Reply #18
36. Like Bush, you seem to have forgotten he was President for 9/11.
And President when the shoe-bomber was caught.

I wouldn't call the Bush reign "safer."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #36
48. It was safer from molestation by Government Agents for innocent
passengers. And no. I did not forget that 9/11 happened under Bush. It happened because either we had an incompetent moron in the WH who ignored 52 warnings of an imminent attack or because they didn't really want to stop it. Take your pick.

9/11 could have been prevented without moilesting paseengers had the Bush gang made the threat of terror a priority as Clinton had done. And FYI, without any molestation of the traveling public, the Clinton administration prevented multiple terror attacks at least two of which would have been worse than 9/11 had they ignored the warnings the way the Bush administration did.

But then, if Bush HAD, like Clinton would have, stopped 9/11 what would they haave used as an excuse to start two wars and a whole new Police State under the direction of the eerily named 'Homeland Security'. It has been most profitable for an awful lot of people. So, I guess for those individuals and Corps, it's been a very good thing that 9/11 was not prevented.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #48
49. Unfortunately, Obama will never be able to rollback the post 9/11
security because there will always be a chance of another such incident -- and there would be even if Hillary had been elected.

Under the Obama administration, however, just as under Clinton, there have been several major attacks averted. It is much easier to forget about the ones we avoid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #49
52. Under Clinton several major attacks were prevented without
any of this abuse to ordinary Americans. More than under most administrations in recent times. Because the Intel Community was allowed to do its job.

And Obama did not have to 'roll back' anything. All he had to do was NOT to increase the abusive practices. Enhanced pat-downs and Naked scanners were introduced by this administration.

But, they WILL be rolled back in spite of this administration or any other. In just the six months since these egregious abuses of our rights were introduced, 11 states, outraged by them and in response to public outrage, along with Congress where several members have expressed outrage also, all have introduced or are planning to, legislation to make these abusive practices illegal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #52
54. The scanners were introduced in 2007 when the shrub was President. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #54
56. You forgot to mention that only a few were installed in
Edited on Mon Jun-27-11 01:30 AM by sabrina 1
a few airports and it was 2008, June to be precise. HOWEVER, because of the Civil Rights Groups who had fought them for years, TSA spokespersons assured the travelling public that the did not have to use them!

In June, 2008 in response to the objections to these machines, the TSA reassured the public:

Lara Uselding, a TSA spokeswoman, said passengers were not obliged to accept the new machines.

"The passengers can choose between the body imaging and the pat-down," she said.


That was the normal pat-down that no one had any objection to.

But in January 2009, this administration ordered billions of dollars worth of them and started installing them in hundreds of airports.

When the public continued to opt out of using them, THEN this administration's TSA introduced the 'Enhanced Pat-Downs' to force passengers into using them, fearful that they would not be funded if the public continued to have the choice given them under Bush.

Fortunately now though, Congress is considering refusing to fund them. Hopefully that will happen.

Meantime, considering that the last order was worth $44 billion of our tax dollars, and the one before that, more billions of our tax dollars, Chertoff's clients, Rapiscan, are smiling and thanking the gods that what Bush failed to do, this administration did with the support of many progressives who under Bush were screaming about the abuse of their rights.

Amazing what the difference between a 'D' and an 'R' can be!

However, for most progressives, the issue and the principles involved are what count and they have not changed their opinion of these abuses because the 'R' became a 'D'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dawson Leery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #52
80. Clinton did allow the intelligence community (or perhaps made them) to do their job.
As for any roll-back of these overly intrusive, constitution violating, porno-searches, why do you see them being rolled back?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:35 PM
Response to Original message
23. I was over once for something absolutely trivial.
I had some odd liquid in a bottle in my carry on. I would have put in a check-in bag, but I didn't check a bag thanks to the high charges for checking.

Anyway, the liquid was a particular vitamin oil that my doctor advised me to use for a hand condition. It is clear and viscous. I got through. The questions were invasive and completely unnecessary. It was a huge waste of time.

And that is the problem. The TSA is, in my opinion, at the level at which it is operating, a waste of time and money. Airlines are not the only things vulnerable to terrorism and random violence.

Nuclear accidents are beginning to look like a more likely threat than airline terrorism at this point. Yet we are so focused on threats to our planes and trains and buses, that we are ill prepared for other much more likely safety hazards. Think floods, fires, earthquakes, tornadoes and hurricanes -- much more likely.

LA could be hit by a huge earthquake that could cause big fires. Yet I do not think that the evacuation plans for our city are very clear to residents. In fact there may be no plan.

So the resentment against the TSA should not be dismissed. The manpower and brainpower could be better invested. Do we need some TSA? Yes. But we have overdone it in my view.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #23
30. well, if you read the PSA's that are staring at you while you are in line
they are working toward better technology and less "intrusive" searches. Especially in the area of liquids.

They are working on improvements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tammywammy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:49 PM
Response to Original message
33. I flew for my vacation a few months ago
I found it no different than every other time I've been traveling. The TSA was friendly. After 2001 I was pulled aside for extra screening nearly every time I flew.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:56 PM
Response to Original message
37. but your threshold is too high --basically you have no problem if they follow their own rules
i've seen some break the rules and but i've also seen things far too invasive that i'm sure don't break the rules/procedures.

and the thing is --it's not making us safer. they are mostly pulling older folks with obvious disabilities off to the side for the full workups. i'm not saying they should heavily profile, but all their vaunted security is mainly good at people with metal in their bodies. that's a terrible diversion of resources towards something that is not the source of risk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 12:03 AM
Response to Original message
39. I've had only positive or neutral experiences, too, though I don't fly as frequently as you.
For example, last time I went in a scanner, the TSA person asked me to move my pendant necklace around to my back. Afterwards, she explained that that meant she only had to pat my upper back (since the metal showed up there on the scan). She didn't have to ask me to move my necklace; and she didn't have to offer an explanation, either. She was just being professional and courteous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sen. Walter Sobchak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 01:16 AM
Response to Original message
55. It depends on the airport
I have never found the TSA at LAX, DFW, PHX or any NYC area airport to be anything other than belligerent hooligans. The TSA at SNA on the other-hand are about as offensive as Wal-Mart greeters. But at the end of the day I don't really care how friendly or professional they are, I don't want a groping from a Pullman Porter either, supposedly famed British hangman Henry Pierrepoint would greet the condemned by the first name with a cheerful Good Morning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 01:29 AM
Response to Original message
57. Next you'll be saying that you aren't hungry & know no one that is...
so hunger in America as a problem is all one big exaggeration.... This frequent flyer calls BS on your conclusion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CBGLuthier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 06:27 AM
Response to Original message
59. Same lame shit said by white guys about DWB. no cop ever treats them that way
Thanks for volunteering to give away our rights. You are a swell american tool.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 06:52 AM
Response to Reply #59
61. It is pure politics with this one, he all but said this happy horseshit would have been a problem
if McShame had been elected but since Obama, it is peachy.

There are some folks in this nation from either party that are uber-partisans that place party politics over civil rights, civil liberties, matters of war and peace, and about whatever you can hold dear or is important for the health of a people.

They are fully capable of advocating what they fiercely opposed and then flipping back again should leadership change.

It is all about their "team" winning the Superbowl every four years. What the team does with that victory is utterly immaterial as long as they win again.

Such loyalty to party can only mean one is a traitor to their nation and a sell out of their fellow citizens.
I had believed this was mostly a Republican failing but just as many Democrats, if not more, are the same way.

I despise them. Folks with shitty principles are an impoement overf those with none.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #61
89. ^^^ This.
:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
piratefish08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 06:30 AM
Response to Original message
60. cool. there must be no problem.
unless you're 95, have cancer and have to remove your adult diaper to be searched.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 06:57 AM
Response to Reply #60
62. How well you are treated is not the issue...
No one should have to go through this humiliation. All because someone did not do their job on September 11th, 2001.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boston bean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 07:02 AM
Response to Original message
63. Do you wear a diaper?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #63
76. I don't know about him....

But I usually show up with an invalid that I am trying to get aboard a flight that I'm not taking myself, and want to make sure that person isn't screened.

Ummm...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Union Scribe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 07:09 AM
Response to Original message
65. Mussolini: he makes the planes run on time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HipChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 07:09 AM
Response to Original message
66. I agree about the TSA BS...I fly 2-3 per week..
Edited on Mon Jun-27-11 07:14 AM by HipChick
I'm female..too..been flying for the last 14 years..
I can't see the big deal about the Rapidscan...I work in technology..even if they copied off the images on a USB and uploaded them somewhere..how would they tie the image to the passenger ID? And seriously, the majority of the folks passing through TSA, I wouldn't want to see naked anyway..

I'm not giving TSA a pass...I've had my experiences over the years...I was once escorted out on airport by 6 burly TSA agents..I didn't go running to the media..I am willing to admit I brought that on myself..my crime? I told the TSA they were taking too fucking long with inspection my stuff, and they need to take their OTJ training person elsewhere because I was going to miss my plane..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 07:15 AM
Response to Original message
67. 75,000 miles the last 6 months...
and I personally have had not trouble.

But with that said--- I am fully aware that TSA needs to be overhauled top to bottom with new and consistent rules.

It seems that each airport has different TSA rules... liquids are my biggest pet peeve... some make you take it out of your carry on...most do not... in my mind it either one or the other...

and the pat downs are becoming increasingly ridiculous.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HipChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 07:16 AM
Response to Reply #67
68. I've never taken liquids out or used those silly bags either..
Mind you..as a FF, you learn to pack effectively..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #68
77. I find the smaller airports are the ones who are sticklers.
I'll go through JFK-DFW-LAX, etc...and never pull the liquids out....

I'll go through the Omaha airport and have to pull it out.

thing is--- you run your bag thorough--- you see them at the other end pick it up....and you say--- oh know---- here comes the "do you have liquids" question... then they go through your bag, put it all in a plastic bag---run it through again.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 07:17 AM
Response to Original message
69. WOW, I guess police never mistreat people either because they have been nice to me? LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 07:18 AM
Response to Original message
70. Pavlov's dog...
Frequent fliers become conditioned. No big deal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
75. And I call BS on your BS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #75
78. Why
I can confirm what the OP said...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #78
79. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #79
90. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
81. As someone wisely said above and I'll repeat.
Edited on Mon Jun-27-11 01:54 PM by Puglover
"It's never happened to me so it doesn't count." Bzzt, fail. I worked for NWA for 31 years and dealt with hundreds of irates due to their experience with the TSA and you are 100 percent wrong.
Are they all bad? Of course not, but alot are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 02:05 PM
Response to Original message
83. The operative word in your entire post is "I"
While you may not receive the hassle that others do, while you may not witness the scenes others have witnessed, it doesn't mean that these outrages don't take place.

Meanwhile, we have hundreds and thousands of reports of TSA outrages, what, we should simply discount all of that because of your experience? I think not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #83
84. "Hundreds and thousands of reports of TSA outrage"
Bullshit.

Please show us where these "hundreds and thousands" of reports are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pitohui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
85. they're not all professional
i had one incident of successful pilfering and one attempted theft at LAS (those screeners are no longer there), and i've seen some pitiful crowd control at notoriously bad airports such as PHX and PHL, and at my home airport, while the screeners try to be friendly, it's MSY (new orleans, party, party), they are not always professional, i've overheard some chitchat about TSA weekend plans or parties that i didn't need to hear from people who were supposedly at work

i'm a frequent flyer, but i do more long hauls as opposed to 2-3 flights a week, but i have to say that it is not logical that everyone you meet in a job, 2-3 times a week, is going to be professional, it would be nice if they were, but it doesn't happen

i think most of them are well intentioned, and they are just trying to do their job, some do it better than others, like any other job frankly

i always heard the "stupid travellers" called "kettles," but "stupid traveller" is descriptive and i don't know why people feel the need to pretend that they don't know what you're talking about...there are a lot of stupid people out there, even dan quayle knew that half the population is below average!

i get pulled out a lot, i assume because i frequently travel solo yet not on business, independent travellers are just as suspicious as any other breed of independent human
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoneOffShore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 06:27 PM
Response to Original message
92. Guess what L-3 used to do before they made the Nudoscope
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-27/abu-ghraib-inm...

"The inmates sought to sue CACI International Inc. (CACI), which helped interrogate prisoners at the facility, and Titan Corp., which provided translation services. Titan has since been renamed and is now part of L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. (LLL)

The inmates, who were civilian detainees, said they were subjected to abuses by CACI and Titan employees including beatings, sexual humiliation, exposure to extreme temperatures and rape. In court papers, the inmates said some prisoners were tortured into unconsciousness and several were murdered."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
94. "expert traveler line" ???
Has air travel become so complicated and difficult, that they actually have a different line for people that are classified as experts at it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ManiacJoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #94
97. Sadly, yes.
Not so much the "experts", but the folks needing the "idiots" line would object to the accurate labeling. The TSA checkpoints are only one such place for the filtering to take place.
:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #94
98. The line moves faster because "expert" travelers
know what to do in the line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #98
100. And what would that be? Bend over and cough?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
99. Mr. "See No Evil" vs. 6 egregious examples to the contrary:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Aug 23rd 2014, 04:52 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC