Your Morning Cup Of TSA Horror

Man with a bladder bag says a TSA patdown left him humiliated and soaked in urine. [MSNBC]
Video of frustrated father ripping shirt off shy son so TSA can complete search. [YouTube]
Video of 3-year old girl screaming and writhing during TSA patdown. Her teddy being taken away and going through the x-ray seemed to have set her off. [KGTV]
Airport opt-out day is imbecilic. [Slate]
TSA bumper stickers: “It’s not a grope, it’s a freedom pat.” [Althouse]

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. msbask says:

    All that needs to be said was quoted in the article: “… if this country is going to sacrifice treating people like human beings in the name of safety, then we have already lost the war.”

    • Nighthawke says:

      +1 infinite.

    • spamtasticus says:

      My new Hero:

      http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/21/my-tsa-stripdown-vid.html

      Instead of national Opt Out day we need National Fly naked day.

      We should all strip down to our skivvies before stepping through the metal detector!

    • spamtasticus says:

      I forgot to add. This is who we are hiring to protect and keep us safe. Just picture this guy in the back room taking cell phone pictures of your child’s naked scan:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAZaYO2Zz1E

      • Whiskey Tango Foxtrot says:

        So you are trying to insinuate that there has never been a police officer, judge, soldier, teacher, or anybody else in a position of authority do something similar? There are “bad eggs” in EVERY walk of life and every profession/position of authority. Heck here in Canada we just had a Colonel plead guilty to rapes and murders. Is that to insinuate that everybody in the Canadian military is also one? If one goes along with your line of thinking, I guess so!

    • myCatCracksMeUp says:

      “… if this country is going to sacrifice treating people like human beings in the name of safety, then we have already lost the war.”

      That is so true.

      I feel absolutely sick reading about these different instances of TSA horrors. But I also think every single time someone has to go through the scanner or get patted down is a horror. It’s sickening.

      • spamtasticus says:

        You should read this article then. It gets to the real problem with what the TSA is doing. Not just the symptoms.

        http://papersplease.org/wp/2010/11/22/self-restraint-is-not-the-solution-for-the-tsa/

        • myCatCracksMeUp says:

          I appreciate you posting the link but I have a feeling that I’ll feel even more sick if I do read the linked article. So I’m going to wait a while to build up my nerves first. Seriously – my stomach can’t handle much more right now. Knowing that our government feels free to abuse us mere mortals, while the rich and powerful (which includes all the really high-ups in govt, elected and appointed) aren’t affected by this crap makes me feel sick at my stomach.

    • nodaybuttoday says:

      That was definitely the story that struck me most. This guy has suffered enough from having cancer and is reminded of it every day because of that bag, and now to be humiliated like that? This is one of those stories that really shows they’ve gone too far…

    • dosdelon says:

      “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” – Benjamin Franklin

  2. obits3 says:

    bladder bag – wow, did the man tell the TSA agent prior to pat down?
    frustrated father – did the father take off the shirt or the TSA agent, I can’t tell.

    Change TSA bumper sticker: “It’s not a grope, it’s a cancer awareness check. Here’s a ribbon.”

    • caradrake says:

      He told them, and they said they were not interested in his medical history.

      ““I had to ask twice if it was OK to pull up my shorts,” said Sawyer, “And every time I tried to tell them about my medical condition, they said they didn’t need to know about that.””

      • obits3 says:

        Wow, he should sue sue sue!

        • crazedhare says:

          One of the problems is that government workers going about their business typically have some degree of protections from lawsuits. I am not going to try to overview specifically exactly how much immunity TSA agents have, but in general my sense is that a government employee can’t be sued for acts reasonably a part of doing the job they were asked to do. That is why the DA’s are saying they will press charges for sexual assault when the circumstances are present, and why proposed legislation stripping that immunity is more important than it appears to be. As much as philosophically we know that we don’t always accept the excuse of a government worker or soldier just “following orders,” we still give a pretty significant amount of legal protection to potential civil defendants of that class.

          • Pax says:

            So, don’t sue the individual workers. Sue the TSA as a whole. Poof, problem solved.

            • crazedhare says:

              That is even harder to do.

            • Firethorn says:

              So, don’t sue the individual workers. Sue the TSA as a whole. Poof, problem solved.

              There’s a little problem with this. Did you know that you need permission to sue a federal government organization? It can be very difficult.

              Personally, I recommend writing President Obama, your senators and representatives. Keep it short, to the point, and polite.

              • tooluser says:

                Your elected officials do not exhibit any trace of humanity. That’s how they get elected. And that’s how they are dehumanizing you.

    • wonderkitty now has two dogs says:

      He tried to, but they wouldn’t listen. They also left him without a word about they had done, even though he now had wet spots all over him from the urine leaking out of the hole in his abdomen.

      The father took off the shirt because the TSA kept trying to pat the kid down, but said kid wasn’t playing. It was out of rage and frustration. The TSA agent put it back on him.

      • obits3 says:

        I get the father’s frustration, but he shouldn’t have removed his son’s shirt. I joke, but what if it was his wife? Would he just rip off her shirt? You only have the right to embarrass yourself in this way, not the right to make that choice for others.

    • pop top says:

      RE: the bladder bag… The guy told them about it several times.

    • evnmorlo says:

      He should have just dropped the bag of nitro and blown off all their legs.

  3. wonderkitty now has two dogs says:

    I’ve been on this for days now. I’ve written two states’ worth of senators and Delta airlines after I cashed in all my miles on stuff and magazine subscriptions, imploring them to stand behind the outcry. I’m not one to think that what I’m doing matters all that much, but I’m trying to be heard.

    This is simply insane, ludicrous, absurd, and purely mental. There honestly aren’t words for it.

  4. Mr. Fix-It says: "Canadian Bacon is best bacon!" says:

    What a shame. I used to like Slate. :/

  5. banndndc says:

    and we found out that the policy makers are exempted from these procedures. Boehner didnt have to wait in line or go through any of the procedures when he flew commercial this weekend. (kinda defeats the purpose of his whole “i’ll fly commercial unlike nancy pelosi” schtick).

    • msbask says:

      This is really one of the problems AGAIN. The number of “officials” who aren’t subject to this is ridiculous. Did you hear what Hillary Clinton said? Of course people are upset, she would be to…. (except she’s not subject to it, so she has no reason to fight it. Once again, it doesn’t affect HER.)

      • outlulz says:

        Why should they be screened? There’s no one under more constant watch and scrutiny than major politicians. They don’t fart without someone knowing about it and playing it on FOX News. If Hilary Clinton ended up being a sleeper cell terrorist I would be a little surprised.

        • banndndc says:

          hundreds of thousands of people have security clearances. should they all be able to bypass the procedures as well?

          but that’s not the point. the issue at hand is equality and the creation of sound policy. ostensibly these procedures are done in the public good and require a sacrifice of some measure of civil liberties. the only way they are acceptable morally is if they apply equally to everybody. from a security standpoint their efficacy relies upon a perceived element of randomness (anyone can get searched at anytime). by providing exceptions that element of randomness is reduced and patterns are identifiable. lastly and perhaps the best reason is that these regulations are done at the behest of our elected officials. if the officials (ie those charged with oversight and promulgation) are exempt then they do not know what the actual impact is and are immune to critcisms that would enable them to fix/change/improve the regulations. especially considering the reduction in civil liberties inherent in such polices it is vitally important that those imposing the regulations are subjected to the impact they have. otherwise they are legally and morally placing themselves above and separate from the common citizenry.

        • mythago says:

          You think politicians never do anything wrong just because someone could stuck a camera in their face? Do you live in a cave?

  6. AstroPig7 says:

    Wow. That Slate author is an ignorant jackass who completely missed the point of Opt-out Day and has apparently done very little research on backscatter scanners.

    • mmmsoap says:

      Or, you know, terrorists. Yeah, backscatter scanners may (or may not) be useful for detecting things terrorists have already thought of….you know, those things we found out about and derailed without the scanners?

      • AstroPig7 says:

        That’s the biggest problem with U.S. airport security: it’s mostly reactive and ineffective. (One could argue its effectiveness as a deterrent, but that’s difficult to show.) Anyone serious about terrorizing us will get through. As is, we can only keep out inept terrorists who were lucky they didn’t blow themselves up while preparing their explosives.

    • Kavatar says:

      What you mean to say is that they haven’t done the kind of research that supports YOUR point of view. You can find scientists who say that just about anything is unsafe. Doesn’t mean it truly is unsafe.

      • AstroPig7 says:

        The problem is actually a lack of evidence. The FDA approved a scanner that was tested for far less time than any equivalent medical scanner. This sort of expediency is never warranted when public health can be affected, and there is no long-term data to show how safe this type of radiation really is. This is not a matter of trusting a crackpot, it’s a matter of basic procedure and irresponsibility. Also, the devices are useless from a security standpoint, because any serious terrorist can find a way around them.

      • Pax says:

        I don’t give a fuck about UNSAFE.

        But I damned certainly well do care about CIVIL LIBERTIES, and the AIT (and alternate “enhanced” pat-down) are STABBING THEM IN THE FACE WITH A CHAINSAW.

      • mythago says:

        You can buy all the science you want saying something is safe, actually. But the problem here is we don’t know, because the TSA hasn’t bothered to do its homework.

    • spamtasticus says:

      I bet $100 that the author of the Slate article wrote it as an attention getting troll.

    • Buckus says:

      Other than regurgitating the TSA party-line, his whole other argument seems to be “It’ll inconvenience ME.”

      Well, I may not have lived in the sixties when these things happened more often, but isn’t the point of civil disobedience to disrupt and cause inconvenience?

      I mean, how many people were on the bus with Rosa Parks yelling at her to just sit down so they could get hom?

  7. Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

    Thank you Consumerist for posting a counter-argument article regarding this issue, and a well-written one at that. It helps to show you as an un-biased source of information, even if presented with your typically liberal witty reparte.

    • JulesNoctambule says:

      Yeah, I agree that a functioning sense of humour is a ‘typically liberal’ trait, too!

    • pop top says:

      This isn’t really an article, is it? It’s just a collection of links. It’s not their fault this shit makes conservatives look bad. If you don’t like the slant of the site, you probably shouldn’t be here.

      • Zowzers says:

        Now I’m curious as to how you equate TSA being stupid to conservatives looking bad.

      • fs2k2isfun says:

        You do know the most egregious of the TSA failures have occurred under Obama/Napolitano right? Not to let Bush off easily, but the ball is in Obama’s court on this one.

      • SissyOPinion says:

        I think Loias was specifically referring to the Slate article link.

  8. Supes says:

    Meanwhile, I’ll be taking a train to get home for Thanksgiving and going through absolutely zero security. Funny how that works.

    • Brontide says:

      Don’t worry, the TSA will get around to ruining train travel with the next big stimulus/bailout package money.

  9. ooeygooey says:

    Better bumper sticker/t-shirt: “Don’t Grope Me, Bro!”

  10. msbask says:

    No pat-down on Greyhound.
    No invasive scans on the Long Island Railroad or Amtrak.
    Thousands of people will go over bridges with no security.
    Millions more will travel through tunnels without this bogus security.
    Untold numbers will will travel the subways of NYC without this garbage.

    Is this all because nothing has happened on Greyhound or the tunnels or the subways, etc? And once it does, my tampon will have to be examined and approved by some border crossing guard before I can get from NY to NJ?

    • msbask says:

      (Darn. This was supposed to be in response to Supes’ post.)

    • Mr. Fix-It says: "Canadian Bacon is best bacon!" says:

      Somebody’ll post the article about the backscatter X-ray vans in response to this, no doubt.

      But really, all it will take is some crazy person to derail an Amtrak to put this in pretty much every form of long-distance travel available :(

  11. Macgyver says:

    Why did the kid have to take his shirt off?

    Instead of doing that opt out day, people should go to the airport naked that day.

  12. mythago says:

    I’ve seen a few people who wear Utilikilts threatening to show up ‘traditionally’ garbed, i.e., commando. I hope they follow through.

  13. mannyvel says:

    Why can’t people just be good Jews and let the TSA do its job? The yellow stars are for your own safety and protection!

  14. Onesnap says:

    I went through the naked scan and although I did not like it anything is better than a grope!

    • fs2k2isfun says:

      I wonder if you’ll still feel that way in the event you get a cancer where radiation exposure from these machines is a contributing factor.

    • snowmentality says:

      That’s great for you. What if you have an implant or prosthesis, or a disability where you can’t raise your arms above your head, so you don’t have the option of just going through the scanner?

      And even if you do go through the scanner, if the image is blurred or anything shows up (like a tissue in your pocket or an odd fold in your clothing), you’ll get groped anyway.

  15. dush says:

    This will never go away until either airline business goes away or grinds to a crawl.
    The flying public has the solution in their hands. The thing is a majority of the flying public is fine with putting up with it.

    • ClaudeKabobbing says:

      I agree When we all quit flying unless absolutly there is no other choice nothing will change.

    • msbask says:

      100% true.

      The thing is that I almost never fly (once every 10 years or so). This infuriates me and it doesn’t even affect me!

  16. partofme says:

    How do they actually do the selection? I have a feeling this varies by airport. I’ve heard that some are truly random, and you essentially get to a fork in the road, stand on a thing, and then a light flashes for which direction you go. A massive series of opt-outs would cause chaos with this system.

    If, on the other hand, they just essentially grab whoever is next when they have a screener available (plus a queue of people who have failed the metal detector or are pre-marked for secondary screening), then an opt-out day wouldn’t really slow the overall line at all. All that would happen is more people would slide through the metal detector as those who are selected take more time.

  17. must hold harmless says:

    I actually flew on Saturday and was asked to go through the backscatter scanner. I opted out and asked for a pat down.

    I (personally) found nothing wrong with it.

    They requested that a female TSA worker come over and she first asked me if I wanted to go into the backroom or if out in the open was fine. I told her doing the pat down right there was fine. She then sat me down and discussed every action that she would take. The pat down began and once again she told me everything that she was going to do before doing it. She also stated that if at any time I felt uncomfortable that I should let her know and we could go into a private room.

    One last thing, I must state that I can’t even imagine what this would be like for someone who was molested in the past. For someone like that, I can see this being EXTREMELY uncomfortable. However, like I said, I personally did not find anything wrong with the proceedure as the TSA agent was INCREDIBLY professional and understanding at all times.

    • msbask says:

      For people who were molested, yes, this must be a nightmare.

      But what about for people who simply are uncomfortable with complete strangers feeling their breasts, buttocks and genitals? How about people who wear adult diapers? Or insulin pumps? Or sanitary napkins? Or have colostomy bags? How about teenagers (girls and boys)? And small children? And your 98-year old grandmother?

      I’m glad that the patdown wasn’t a problem for you. Seriously. But the problem with just accepting it is that it makes it seem like everyone else (including anyone listed above) is over-reacting. And I just don’t think they are.

      • must hold harmless says:

        I agree with you. I don’t think anyone is overreacting. That is why I made sure to say that I PERSONALLY did not have a problem with it. I can most definitely see how many people (especially in the instances that you mentioned, many of which I did not even think of) would and I hope that these procedures change.

        Just another addition, I do appreciate how considerate the TSA agent was. I think she did the best that she possibly could in this situation. I feel bad for them all because it’s not a choice that they have to make. Unfortunately it is a job task that was just set upon them.

      • AstroPig7 says:

        There are also people with psychological aversions to being touched. People with OCD typically have sensory issues and freak out if they’re intentionally touched by someone they’re uncomfortable with.

      • catastrophegirl chooses not to fly says:

        as someone with an insulin pump, i know what it takes to knock my infusion set off -it’s not that difficult. i am used to it and still manage to detach at least one a week just when i adjust my clothing wrong. after reading the account of the man with the bladder bag where the seal was broken – it’s not entirely unlike that.
        now if my insulin pump got detached and there was a delay in me putting in a new set, it could be a life threatening medical problem. i don’t really feel like risking a coma or death just to fly somewhere.

    • wonderkitty now has two dogs says:

      I think all the comments about how bad this must be for sex abuse survivors cheapen the complaints from people who are just as uncomfortable, but haven’t been violated.

      You got a good TSA agent. She did do exactly what she was supposed to do, and I’m glad you shared that. There are some decent agents. However, it’s too dependent on the intelligence of the agent in question. I flew 6 times last year did not meet one decent agent in the process. My husband packed a few prohibited items yet made it through just fine. These procedures are because the TSA couldn’t do the job before, and obviously our intelligence sucks or we’d use it instead of TSA hands and fingers. I think the genital touching is a bully tactic to get people in the scanners.

      As a sex abuse survivor and a believer that the US should still operate under the Constitution, I’m not flying. If I allow for the scan, but still “need” to be searched, I can’t opt out. I risk an $11,000 suit. Or what if I’m selected for just an enhanced pat-down? Just thinking that going through the scan to circumvent getting a pat-down is a strawman. The pat-down could still happen. Nope. No way.

      And I don’t think it’s any more violating for me than to could be for you, were an agent to just stick her hand between your legs without telling you. Everyone is at risk for feeling pretty violated.

    • evnmorlo says:

      “Professional”? The Nazis were very professional as they loaded people onto trains. And the TSA doesn’t even play classical music for you while they feel you up!

      • outlulz says:

        I had no idea the TSA was in the business of killing millions of people.

        • fs2k2isfun says:

          Considering the thousands of people who are opting to drive rather than fly, and considering several of them will be killed in roadway accidents this Thanksgiving, yes, the TSA is in the business of killing people.

  18. Evan says:

    Has anyone heard of how celebrities are handling this? While politicians might be able to skirt around this check, celebrities should be ‘normal’ enough to warrant a security check, and most of them probably don’t want the option of being groped by a fan or have their naked pictures taken.
    Seems like this could be leveraged somehow, just not sure how.

    • outlulz says:

      Naked pictures mean no more to them than they do to us. The person viewing the pictures has no way to tell who they’re looking at.

      • LandruBek says:

        absolutely no way to tell . . . unless someone tells them. But that’s impossible! There is just no way to communicate to people at a distance: it would take a sort of exotic “communicator device” relying on some kind of invisible, radiating “waves” to transmit the conversation. It’s pure science fiction!!

      • mythago says:

        Do you think that people who watch Internet porn insist on only looking at people they personally know?

    • CRCError1970 says:

      Not to mention more of them fly privately and aren’t always subjected to the same “security” protocol.

      My neighbor is a Pilot for a private carrier and I recently went on a maintenance flight with him… I walked onto the jet with no security scan at all… I asked him about it via Facebook and here is his complete and unedited reply:

      “Your name was checked against the TSA “No Fly List” which is a requirement for all of our passengers, by Delta Private Jets through whom we do all of our flights. They issue a “trip sheet”, which includes all passenger names and TSA approval, for every flight.There is no required physical screening of private jet passengers, but there has been talk that the TSA wants to change that. Which would be utter BS in my opinion.”

    • fordprefect says:

      Don’t know if you consider Penn Jillette a celebrity, but he got groped recently. good non-hysterical article here:

      http://www.pennandteller.com/03/coolstuff/penniphile/roadpennfederalvip.html

      • Kimaroo - 100% Pure Natural Kitteh says:

        Actually, I wouldn’t call that “recently”, as it was in 2002. Surprizingly, It’s still relevant.

    • catastrophegirl chooses not to fly says:

      dave barry went through it last week, here’s his account

      http://blogs.herald.com/dave_barrys_blog/2010/11/groin-update.html

  19. lifesmyplaypen says:

    I wonder what the policy would be to put some itching powder or something similar all over my pants before entering the checkpoint (while wearing some spandex pants underneath of course). You know whoever was getting a feelski would end up touching their face or arms and be in a world of discomfort afterwards.

  20. Sword_Chucks says:

    I got the patdown last time I flew anyway, this time Ill just go straight to the patdown, but I do forsee a King Leonidas kick if something goes wrong.

  21. ScandalMgr says:

    Saturday Night Live’s satire is the best: http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/snl-spoofs-tsa-pat-downs

  22. roscoe says:

    This controversy is way out of whack. The media is ignoring the 80% who aren’t bothered but instead are focusing/driving the story on the cry babies who would rather take the chance of someone with a bomb strapped to his butt than raise their arms for a couple seconds. Grow up! These people want to kill you by blowing up your airplane!

    • msbask says:

      So what if they decide they want to kill me by blowing up the subway? What will we do then?

      What if they want to stop and search you every time you go over a bridge in case you try to blow it up? Is that okay?

      What if you had to be patted down and scanned everytime you went to work? Is that okay, too?

    • Mr. Fix-It says: "Canadian Bacon is best bacon!" says:

      You say that as if the AIF and ‘enhanced’ pat-downs would actually stop them from doing so, if they were really intent on it.

      The fact is, a terrorist could very easily by-pass the goofy security theater shenanigans, and lives will be lost because more money was invested in the illusion of security than security itself.

    • AstroPig7 says:

      Did you get your figure from that procedurally flawed CBS poll? Also, you’re glossing over the real issues with the backscatter scanner and the enhanced security measures. Reactive, ineffective security is definitely worth complaining about.

    • MuffinSangria says:

      What 80% is that? The CBS poll? Read a little. That poll has been shown over and over again to be faulty and number completely worthless. You might want to stop using it because people who refer to it sound very uneducated.

    • mythago says:

      Satire is supposed to be funny. Idiotic parroting ain’t it.

  23. spamtasticus says:
  24. Putaro says:

    The TSA continues to miss 60-75% of bombs in carry-on luggage in their own tests. If a terrorist has a 60-75% chance of getting their bomb through in their bag, why would they bother strapping it to their body?

    And what will the TSA do if they ever actually caught a suicide bomber? I suspect that we will wind up with a bunch of dead passengers at a checkpoint.

  25. ellemdee says:

    I have a relative with a colostomy bag and breaking the seal would be not just messy and humiliating, but also dangerous as it increases the risk of infection in the colon which, in his case, can very easily be deadly. He also has a pacemaker (internally implanted device visible under the skin + internal leads to the heart) and, in the past, had a PICC line (semi-permanent IV). He has a long beard and wears a do-rag, and often gets targeted by (non-airport) security & cops who say he “looks Muslim”. He hasn’t had to fly in years, but I can imagine the field day the TSA would have trying to screen him.

    We’re not just talking about embarassment when it comes to medical devices. Messing with them can sometimes be very dangerous. If the agents aren’t going to be better trained on how to handle passengers with medical devices, then the TSA should have a doctor or nurse on staff to screen passengers with these devices. At this point, the TSA is endangering the passengers they claim to be protecting.

    • catnapped says:

      Hey, what would you rather have? A blowed up plane or one guy dead of an infection? Choices, people

      (that was sarcasm, just in case someone gets the wrong idea)

    • catastrophegirl chooses not to fly says:

      thanks for this observation. I was just talking to my boss about how any travel I might do for work [very little fortunately] from now on will have to be by car because of my medical devices.
      if a TSA agent knocks out my insulin pump infusion set i have the following problems:

      a] i will likely get upset with them which may lead to me being detained.

      b] if i can’t replace my infusion set within an hour, i’m at risk for going into diabetic ketoacidosis which can lead to coma or death

      c] replacing my infusion set in an airport is about the last thing i ever want to do. with all those people, there’s a whole lot of potential for infection at the infusion site – the infusion site is basically me intentionally wounding myself.

      also i’ve read stories now about people being required to take off medical devices or surrender their medical supplies to be examined in non sterile conditions.

      my pump costs $6700
      the reservoirs for it are $11 each [box of ten $110]
      the infusion sets are $13 each [box of ten $130]
      the bandage/adhesive that goes over it is $1 each
      my continuous glucose monitor is $1200
      the sensors for it are $87 each [would travel with at least three spares at a total of $348]
      the bandage/adhesive that goes over it is $4 each

      so what happens when someone with no medical training wants to pop the cap off a new, sterile infusion set cartridge because they don’t understand what it is and won’t listen to me? or wants to open the package of tubing or spare insulin reservoirs to make sure i’m not smuggling some explosive liquid inside the little tube? or is handling my insulin pump and drops it? there’s a potential loss of hundreds or thousands of dollars, me not traveling anyway because i’m sitting at home waiting for a new pump to arrive and the excitement of me going batshit crazy on some poor TSA agent who hasn’t had the proper training to handle this stuff.

      i know i had to take a 4 hour class and two tests before i was allowed to touch my OWN insulin pump.

      security agents are not in any way even a little bit prepared to handle medical equipment.

  26. NoThankYou says:

    Touching Squeezing Assaulting

  27. MoreThanWYSIWYG says:

    What the heck is wrong with all you idiots out there. Here’s a little word of advise: If you don’t want the pat down, don’t do anything that will prompt you to get one. You have the choice, don’t be an idiot, then complain about it.

    • Mr. Fix-It says: "Canadian Bacon is best bacon!" says:

      You don’t get it, I think. We don’t want the Backscatter machines OR the patdown. They’re BOTH invasive!

    • evnmorlo says:

      I advise you not to call people “idiots” if you can’t spell.

    • AstroPig7 says:

      You mean don’t exist? It’s called random screening for a reason.

    • catastrophegirl chooses not to fly says:

      too late, i already have two medical devices that will require a grope-down if i fly.
      also women having their periods have reportedly been pulled out of the line for a grope-down after the backscatter was unable to identify their feminine products so they got both! how fun for everyone.
      neither of these things is something that the people involved have a lot of control over avoiding.

    • mythago says:

      Okay. When I get into the TSA line, I’ll hand you my bloody menstrual pad to hold while I walk through security, so I don’t “do anything” that might look suspicious.

  28. Jason says:

    Added a little politics and TSA horror to my weekly metal comic strip
    http://www.thegauntlet.com/article/1225/20491/Metal-Break:-Episode-3.html

  29. mebaman says:

    I might be for this if the former head of El Al (who should know something about airport security) didn’t think this whole body scan/molestation procedure was ridiculous. I’m further troubled by the fact that checked baggage is not subjected to nearly the level of scrutiny that passengers and carry-on is. Given the fact that our most determined terrorists are somewhat indifferent as to whether they carry the bomb into the passenger compartment or stow it away underneath, our current procedures seem to ignore one equally plausible scenario while overplaying the other.

  30. IntheKnow says:

    Body scanners combined with a national ID scanned which is linked to who you are and where you live. Add “profiling,” that’s right – those who have a higher probability, as determined by security experts, get pulled and questioned further. Right now Middle Easterners and Muslims, “exchange” students make the list. The politically correct can take their sorry act to a Muslim country, say or print a “bad” word about Mohammed, and suffer the consequences.
    Patting down grandmothers, kids, etc has turned into an ugly perversion with no rational cause and effect. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if perverts are applying to the TSA in record numbers.

  31. Chasing Headless Chickens says:

    They gave me the full body scan AND the full body pat down. Everything I read on the internet says they do one or the other. How is that fair!? I didn’t feel violated before, but now I kinda do. They looked at my junk AND touched my junk. : (

  32. u1itn0w2day says:

    Right now I’m starting to hear more and more sheeple advocate the TSA procedures under the guise ” if you are not hiding anything what are YOU afraid of…” or my favorite “I want to be safe”(in other words screw your rights and dignity in favor of MY security) . Sickening.

    Just like you have the xmas creep you now have the police state creep. Too many can’t see it coming.

    • catnapped says:

      It’ll be those of us warning of it that’ll be sent to the ovens, not the sheep (since we’re “conspiring with the terrorists”)