[Clielldub]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/11/24...-workers-push/


TAMPA, Fla. -- They've been called molesters, threatened with violence and ordered not to touch "my junk."

One woman headbutted a TSA officer who was searching her laptop. Other screeners report being punched, kicked and shoved during pat-downs. Security officers know the new searches are more invasive but want Thanksgiving travelers to keep in mind they are just doing their jobs to keep people safe.

"We just want the public to understand that we're not perverts," said screener Ricky D. McCoy, who heads a local TSA union for Illinois and Wisconsin.


I think it's totally uncalled for if people are actually assaulting TSA workers. They do not want to "grab your junk" anymore then the person standing next to you. They have a job to do. I'm sure they would rather not have to do the pat downs but the policies get put out they have to follow it or quit. In this economy, do you think someone is going to give up a job?

There is no reason for passengers to punch, kick or headbutt a TSA worker. If the TSA worker gets out of line with you, ask for a manager but by assaulting them you are just going to get arrested. I have a feeling that the policy will change. Not soon but over the next few months watch.

[nuncEtedben]

Nobody is suggesting they are "perverts". Nobody but their own union boss even uses the word "pervert". (Note, by using that term they are trying to victimize themselves to gain popular support). What people are questioning is the right against unreasonable search by TSA employees and whether these searches are effective.

[strollerssfsfs]

"We're creeps, there's a difference!"

[JackieC]

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/insideisr...es-Hysterical/

[Andoror]

A top Israeli airport security expert says the new screening procedures being implemented by the Transportation Security Administration are a "hysterical" reaction to the terrorist threat.

Ben Gurion Airport's former director of security Pini Schiff warns that the TSA pat-downs and body scanners won't be effective in pinpointing terrorists.

"When you are wasting time and when you are wasting manpower and the level of service to the passengers is so low - something is missing in the way of finding the passenger you are looking for," he said.

"When millions of passengers are suspected, how can you find the one suspect passenger you are looking for? It's impossible to do," he concluded.

Schiff also says the new system will be impossible to sustain and said he wonders what will happen when it breaks down.

Israel, a world leader in aviation security, began implementing profiling techniques in the 1970s.

"Already from the early 1970s our security officials realized that we had to check commercial cargo, not just travelers, hand bags, and luggage," Schiff said in a recent interview with Army Radio.

"Profiling is the key," he told the Jerusalem Post. "There are many different elements that need to be looked at - who is sending the cargo, what is being sent and where it is going."

Opponents of profiling say such methods could lead to religious or ethnic discrimination.

"We are not talking about discrimination," Schiff told the U.K.'s Sky News.

"We are talking about passengers who have to be checked differently to other passengers," he explained. "It can be a Jew, Christian, Muslim whatever."

[Aswdwdfg]

TSA's biggest problem...they are unionized.

[allmyflights]

Great point...what does happen when the scanners break down? How come no one has brought that up until now?

[Indoendris]

Nobody is suggesting they are "perverts". Nobody but their own union boss even uses the word "pervert". (Note, by using that term they are trying to victimize themselves to gain popular support). What people are questioning is the right against unreasonable search by TSA employees and whether these searches are effective.

I think it's referring to those who get reported in the news. I have read comments elsewhere that people have called them "perverts" etc. Well the most recent poll stating 4/5 people approve of the measures, I don't think they need much more support. The news doesn't help with their sensationalizing. I saw on Bill O'Reilly talking about it they showed a video of a little kid getting a pat down (that didn't seem invasive at all) and in the corner I noticed it read "2007!" He didn't even use a recent video! Plus people need to realize the videos published are extremely one sided. No one can see what led to getting the search. Not everyone goes through those scanners. If you set off the metal detector they send you through or randomly send people. Plus I just read reports of an actress from Dexter who went through it and she said it was fine and another actor, I can't remember off the top of my head his name, had the pat down and didn't get his "junk" grabbed.

I don't know. I think the TSA is being too reactive and I agree the TSA chief did the wrong thing by not announcing the new procedures. He could've just had them say "Security procedures at the airports will be changing. See your local airports for any questions." Him worrying about "not letting our enemies" know our procedures well they do now! That was just bad business right there. They need to be more proactive. Plus just do behavioral profiling BUT they need to have actual trained people who know what to look for; not random TSA agents.

I just don't blame the workers. That's like when people blame military servicemembers for wars when all we're doing is our jobs. Or like when they called Vietnam troops who came back "baby killers." Alot of them were forced to go. So I don't blame workers unless it's someone who actually abuses their job and any amount of power they get.

[DevaRextusidis]

Great point...what does happen when the scanners break down? How come no one has brought that up until now?

Because everyone is reactive, not proactive. Plus, the countries where cargo come from to the US need to increase their security. Or even passenger flights from other countries. I really do have a feeling the current procedures are going to change. Until then, I'm just not going to hassle TSA workers at the airport because it's just not their fault -it's their boss' fault.

[Markdogas]

Every time i hear on the radio these TSA fraks saying this is for my security, i want to scream at them, if that is so, why are they being done here, when all the threats we have had came FROM ABROAD!

[BeaseHoca]

We bowed down to the terrorists starting in the mid 90's. Trying to make deals with UBL let him see our leaders in the White House were weak. He acted and since then and especially after 9/11 we have been changing the way WE live. Changing the way WE treat and see our privelages and "rights". We have created this monster that now exists by not taking action when needed. When we do take action, the leaders who had the guts to do it are said to be bullies. There were no WMD in Iraq BLAH BLAH BLAH! There were, just not the big missles. Chem and Bio are WMD. We have spent bazzilions in making others rich by making all our bases meet a Force Protection Standard. We do need to make our bases more secure and we have done that, BUT, where do you draw the line? We as soldiers were always told, you can always improve your fighting position. Fighting position being the key word. Our bases, our homes, etc are not fighting positions. There our safe havens. All we are doing now is boarding up all the windows, triple locking the doors, sneaking around when we need something. TSA is just another one of those steps. We have let the terrorists control what we do without them doing anything but instilling fear. They say boo, we hide. They make threats we get wobbly kneed. I am not talking about the military. I am talking about the REST of the country. As long as we keep pussy footing around with the bad people of this world and threatening to stop sending financial aid and commercial trade to these bad countries, they will keep doing what they are. TSA is part of the animal now. Deal with it. These men and woman are doing a job. I am sure its not the highlight of the day for MOST of them when it comes to feeling up some fat old guy's crotch. WE have forced him to do it. Until the rules change thats the way it will be. Either go through the scanners (hopefully they are safe) or get searched....your choice. If neither of those work for you....take the train,bus, or walk or drive. Wait till they (terrorists) find a loop hole and get through...we will be sending our luggage a day early on a carrier after its been xrayed, then we will be completly searched. You watch, there will come a day when you will not be allowed to fly with anything but a small bag. Why? Because there are too many bleeding heart wimps in leadership positions who will worry about the rights of these oxygen theifs over mine.

Molon Labe!

[benderkoz]

From abroad eh? Logan Airport is in Boston MA. That occured on a little date in history 9-11. Just saying.

[bloriMal]

From abroad eh? Logan Airport is in Boston MA. That occured on a little date in history 9-11. Just saying.

Since 9-11-01 the two terrorist attacks concerning aircraft occurred on flights coming from OUTSIDE the US to the US. So therefore, really, other countries need to up their security.

[leoto5Fm]

Since 9-11-01 the two terrorist attacks concerning aircraft occurred on flights coming from OUTSIDE the US to the US. So therefore, really, other countries need to up their security.

That we know about. How many to do you think we planned or stopped because of the new security?

[Avaboormavoro]

That we know about. How many to do you think we planned or stopped because of the new security?

What do you mean "how many do you think we planned?" We didn't plan any terrorist attacks on our own planes or people so what does that mean?

And I'll tell you I highly doubt we stopped any because of new security. If terrorists want to get us, they will figure out a way. It's not really hard when the news continues to publish the military's TTPs and operation schedule. I'm sure the security thwarts some terrorists but we are behind the power curve on the airport security. We're too reactive, and not proactive but that's because they are an evolving bunch the terrorists who hate us.

I honestly don't care if I have to go through the scanner to get home for Christmas. I'll do it. Doesn't bother me a bit. I'm just saying that the security really isn't going to stop someone if they want to get on a plane plus they're probably now looking elsewhere since Wikileaks so graciously posted the 'hit list' of critical infrastructure points.

[Andoror]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40548607...ss-us_business

I knew it was a matter of time before they went to the mail. Not strip searching yet. I don't see how showing a photo ID will stop bombs from getting in the mail though...

[Fertassa]

What do you mean "how many do you think we planned?" We didn't plan any terrorist attacks on our own planes or people so what does that mean?

And I'll tell you I highly doubt we stopped any because of new security. If terrorists want to get us, they will figure out a way. It's not really hard when the news continues to publish the military's TTPs and operation schedule. I'm sure the security thwarts some terrorists but we are behind the power curve on the airport security. We're too reactive, and not proactive but that's because they are an evolving bunch the terrorists who hate us.

I honestly don't care if I have to go through the scanner to get home for Christmas. I'll do it. Doesn't bother me a bit. I'm just saying that the security really isn't going to stop someone if they want to get on a plane plus they're probably now looking elsewhere since Wikileaks so graciously posted the 'hit list' of critical infrastructure points.

Precicely. PLUS until i see x terrorist captured who has documented info on 'mission xyz canceled due to heightened security at airports, mission TUV canceled for same reason, go with option PRQ" i won't give any creadence to people who blabber about
"What about those we may have stopped"?

How the heck can we ever know that we stopped them???

I knew it was a matter of time before they went to the mail. Not strip searching yet. I don't see how showing a photo ID will stop bombs from getting in the mail though... Well since the terrorists have an easy job of getting fake ids, or use some of our states which allow illegals to get proper ones (just so we do't stop them getting needed services) i can't see this doing anything.

[gorbasevhuynani]

Precicely. PLUS until i see x terrorist captured who has documented info on 'mission xyz canceled due to heightened security at airports, mission TUV canceled for same reason, go with option PRQ" i won't give any creadence to people who blabber about
"What about those we may have stopped"?

How the heck can we ever know that we stopped them???

How can we know? That's a great question in itself. We never will know how many we actually deter, only how many are caught in the act. I agree 100%. In my mind security procedures rarely ever stop the guy who is determined, only make us feel safer, and to make the other guy flinch occasionally. If we looked back at successfully intercepted attempts we could ask ourselves which part of our procedures actually contributed to catching it in the act. Then do those and only those things as our security procedures and have a minimum impact on our convenience.

I think the bigger questions are "how threatened do we really feel?" and "what are we willing to put up with if it will possibly mitigate that threat?".

Millions of successes are invisible when it comes to security, and 1 failure becomes all we care about.

[WhiliaStelt]

What do you mean "how many do you think we planned?" We didn't plan any terrorist attacks on our own planes or people so what does that mean?

And I'll tell you I highly doubt we stopped any because of new security. If terrorists want to get us, they will figure out a way. It's not really hard when the news continues to publish the military's TTPs and operation schedule. I'm sure the security thwarts some terrorists but we are behind the power curve on the airport security. We're too reactive, and not proactive but that's because they are an evolving bunch the terrorists who hate us.

I honestly don't care if I have to go through the scanner to get home for Christmas. I'll do it. Doesn't bother me a bit. I'm just saying that the security really isn't going to stop someone if they want to get on a plane plus they're probably now looking elsewhere since Wikileaks so graciously posted the 'hit list' of critical infrastructure points.

I dont recall what I was trying to say for that part, must have been tired or something. Anyways, I am positive we have thwarted a few even if only during the planning stage. That alone is enough for me to show its worth it. Otherwise we would have been attacked agian. Just like there isnt any real proof we have stopped them there is nothing to back up that is hasnt worked. I agree with the new security and still think its not tight enough.

Terrorists will find a way. Does that make you want to lesson the security to make it easier on them?

[vodaPlaps]

I dont recall what I was trying to say for that part, must have been tired or something. Anyways, I am positive we have thwarted a few even if only during the planning stage. That alone is enough for me to show its worth it. Otherwise we would have been attacked agian. Just like there isnt any real proof we have stopped them there is nothing to back up that is hasnt worked. I agree with the new security and still think its not tight enough.

Terrorists will find a way. Does that make you want to lesson the security to make it easier on them?

I don't want to lessen any security! I just simply stated that we are reactive and not proactive but it's hard to do with these terrorists. I really don't care if I go through the scanner - rather that then have some stranger grope me (who probably would rather not do so). I just don't think it should be just us upping our security. Those two recent incidents came from OUTSIDE the country soooo other countries obviously need to up their security right?