Category Archives: TSA and security

Why do women who are breast cancer survivors have to go through this?


Here we go again, yet another story of the way in which the TSA molests women.  This molestation of the general public has to stop. The TSA has not prevented one single aircraft incident by having these procedures in place. They are of no use at all. What they need is the kind of profiling that is done by the Israelis.

If a woman says that she has undergone breast cancer surgery then that should be sufficient. There is absolutely no need to put women through this agony. The question is why are they doing this? Well the answer is that there was an alert that there would be an attempt to blow up aircraft somewhere in Europe, not the USA. Now the fact remains that Christians are not the ones blowing up aircraft and they are not plotting to blow up aircraft. Yet the PC crowd refuse to look at the real problem. This is what led to the Ft. Hood massacre.

SPOT procedures fail, but TSA searches passengers who question their methods.


Further to my previous post on the subject of searches done by the TSA, I came across this CNN article and thought it was worth posting and making a comment.

Now I am one who does not object to the idea that security at airports need to search passengers and luggage when there is grounds for suspicion. Here in Australia and in other international countries, our customs personnel have had a lot of success in preventing drugs and other items entering the country because of the procedures that they use. The security personnel who attend the screening are usually very polite on the job, even when there is a problem (a slight hiccup!!). However, the TSA is another matter.

CNN obtained a list of 70 “behavioural patterns” used to identify potential “high risk passengers”. The problem with the list is that it does not seem to identify those who are most likely to carry out terrorist threats, and it seems that the TSA uses one indicator in particular “those who criticise vocally and arrogantly the TSA procedures”. I hate to tell them, but those passengers are unlikely to have plastic explosives strapped to their bodies.

What is more, it does not explain why a young professional family of a doctor, his wife and young children were singled out to be searched, and then the little girl of 6 being singled out for a pat-down. It does not compute. The procedures totally stink to high heaven.

The Civil Liberties Union has been weighing in on this controversy and like Michael German, a former  FBI agent says:

“Expressing your contempt about airport procedures — that’s a First Amendment-protected right,” said Michael German, a former FBI agent who now works as legal counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. “We all have the right to express our views, and particularly in a situation where the government is demanding the ability to search you.”

“It’s circular reasoning where, you know, I’m going to ask someone to surrender their rights; if they refuse, that’s evidence that I need to take their rights away from them. And it’s simply inappropriate,” he said.

Now one must not confuse some arrogant behaviour when being questioned, as is noted in the same article, that the 20th hijacker involved with the attack upon the USA via the WTC, Pentagon and Pennsylvania incidents was refused entry into the United States because of arrogant behaviour. As stated further in the CNN article:

Agent Jose Melendez-Perez told the 9/11 commission that Mohammed al-Qahtani “became visibly upset” and arrogantly pointed his finger in the agent’s face when asked why he did not have an airline ticket for a return flight.

But some experts say terrorists are much more likely to avoid confrontations with authorities, saying an al Qaeda training manual instructs members to blend in.

“I think the idea that they would try to draw attention to themselves by being arrogant at airport security, it fails the common sense test,” said CNN National Security Analyst Peter Bergen. “And it also fails what we know about their behaviours in the past.”

The 9/11 commission’s report says that “none of the checkpoint supervisors (on September 11th) recalled the (successful) hijackers or reported anything suspicious regarding their screening.”

But, it says, an airline ticket agent that checked in hijacker Mohammed Atta says Atta “reacted negatively when informed in Portland (Maine) that he would have to check in again in Boston.” Atta “clenched his jaw and said … with some irritation, ‘They told me one step check-in,'” he recalled. The ticket agent recommended the United States hire “behaviour profilers … the way they do overseas,” the report says.

 

What appears clear to me is that the TSA is overstepping when it profiles and then selects people for further security processing, especially when it is breeching the right to free speech. The difference between the Al Qaeda operatives who did behave arrogantly and someone voicing objections based upon bad procedures is obvious.

Not one terrorist has been caught as a result of these faulty TSA procedures. Their “profiling” procedures suck because they continue to refuse to do what is necessary to ensure the safety and well-being of the travelling public. Instead they terrorize little children, the elderly and the disabled, and they prevent young mothers from catching their flights home all in the name of throwing around their own weight.

 

Please read the whole article.

Does TSA have a legit reason to pat down a 6 year old?


I spotted this story at Hot Air.  Now I am personally opposed to these pat downs unless the person is suspected of carrying drugs.

Here in Australia we have a series that covers border patrol which relates to the UK, Australia and New Zealand. I have seen stuff from all three countries. In the U.K. the agents are trained to look for certain signs, including nervousness and will give those people extra attention. Most of the time it pays off, and that includes finding people taking out too much money!!  All three countries use sniffer dogs when doing the checks. All of them have a good record in netting drug dealers.

My point is that it is hardly likely that someone is going to tie a bomb to a 6 year old child. I have seen some of the weak excuses about why it is allegedly necessary and my rejoinder remains the same: the cases they bring up happened in Iraq (using a disabled child) or in some other country where the person who had the bomb in the first place was a Muslim.

Even Richard Reid the shoe bomber was a Muslim!!  Almost every other case where there have been plots to blow up aircraft have been the plots of Muslims.

We all need a realistic approach to the problem. Patting down the general public does not cut it as far as I am concerned. It is something that can be done to people who are under reasonable suspicion of carrying drugs and the like but the rest of the general public should not have to go through the crap.

@@@ update@@@ well who would guess that Michelle Makin had a story that is directly linked to my own comments (but I had not seen her story first!!). I recommend the Michelle Malkin post because it deals with an issue that I raised concerning the training given to security people in airports around the world. It is interesting to point out that Østupid wants to throw more money at TSA Spot when they have failed to detect several potential jihadists, including those involved in the Mumbai massacre when they travelled overseas. Please read the whole thing.

******UPDATE 2********

CNN also has an interesting report that you can find here. It looks like the TSA does not bother with the SPOT indicators but instead applies extra treatment to passengers who express an opinion about the TSA. Charming.  They are not doing their designated job but are instead terrifying potential passengers.