LMAO. Too funny to even critique. What an ignorant witch.
Posted on 10/06/2004 9:11:43 PM PDT by old-ager
Reprinted from NewsMax.com
Fix What's Wrong at the Airport: Start Profiling
Susan EstrichWhy me?
Wednesday, Oct. 6, 2004
In my town, Los Angeles, where three-quarters of all violent crimes are committed by young minority men, it is not a question of racism but rationality, and survival, as former Chief Bernard Parks, himself African-American, explained to me more than once.
At the airport, we waste valuable time and resources searching middle-age American born white women - with Secret Service clearance, no less - on their way to the vice presidential debate.
I stood in one security line for 15 minutes. When I got to the front of the line, the TSA official, who could barely speak English, looked at my boarding pass and told me to go to the back of another long line.
I had given a speech the night before in New Jersey, after flying in that morning from Los Angeles; after Cleveland, I had another speech to give in Connecticut; then on to St. Louis for the next debate; then back to Los Angeles for the weekend; then Colorado for a speech; then Arizona for the final debate.
This is how I lived 20 years ago, when I really was young. I wanted coffee, not another line.
I asked the woman why she was sending me to the back of another line. She didn't answer. I didn't go. We don't do searches in this line, someone else finally told me. Why didn't anyone tell me? No answer.
The least she could do was take me to the front of the other line. I was making too much trouble. Fifteen more minutes in line. No coffee.
I finally got to the front of the next line and was ordered to take a seat. I don't want to sit down - I want to know why I'm being searched. The airline chose you, I was told. Wrong. The airlines don't come up with the criteria, I said.
We have a problem here, I heard one official say to another. We have a woman with a bad attitude, another said. Call for re-enforcements.
At this point, I had asked two questions, gotten no answer to one and a wrong answer to the other, and made one point: that I was neither a terrorist nor a likely terrorist, and that I was on my way to Cleveland for the vice presidential debate.
What's the problem here, the boss demanded, as a new group of officers surrounded me, and the woman searching me felt my bra and my breasts. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry.
If I weren't me, I actually would have been scared. I wondered what they would have done at that moment if I'd been a young black male. Engaged in a little bit of profiling? Taken me to a room somewhere in the airport? Arrested me for my "attitude"?
The fact is, I was searched because between last week's debate in Miami, and this week's in Cleveland and St. Louis, and next week's in Phoenix, not to mention my two speeches, I am traveling on three or four different airlines in these 10 days.
My itinerary runs about four pages, and technically, I have about five one-way tickets. Asking me, or looking at the full itinerary, takes about two minutes.
The search took about 15, the lines another half-hour. I looked at the line slowly moving through. There must be someone who is potentially more dangerous here than me.
The head of security agreed. It's all the fault of the ACLU, he explained. They make us do it this way.
My friend Nadine Strossen, who is the president of the ACLU, would be surprised to find out how much power she has.
I myself am a former president of the Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts and was a member of the National Board of the ACLU. But I still don't know why a useless search of me rather than a carefully tailored screening of others more likely to be engaged in terrorist activity protects civil liberties, much less airline passengers.
When I landed in Cleveland, I learned that half the big-shots on the Washington flight had also been subjects of the "big search." They had one-way tickets, too, since most of them are headed to St. Louis from here. Lots of time wasted today. Hopefully no terrorists slipped through while they were searching journalists.
The top guy at Newark was laughing with me by the end. What can I tell you, he said. No way in the world I'd search you if we were given any choice in the matter. The system makes no sense, he said. Tell Dick Cheney if you see him. We're not going to win the war on terror this way.
As I turned to leave, he added: You must be a conservative. Not me. The conservatives are the ones who put this crazy system into effect. It took Nixon to go to China. It will take liberals to fix what's wrong at the airport.
COPYRIGHT 2004 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
102
WOW, Susan Ostrich deviating from the Leftist line. Will wonders never cease?
She had to do something to make up for her temper tantrum on Greta last night.
Newsmax has to be close to 'retiring' her.
Hey, let's just forget the suits filed by the ACLU soon after 9/11 complaining that airlines were paying too much attention to middle eastern men, making them feel 'abused.' Let's just ignore the lawsuits against airlines for flights that refused to take off until a particular person of middle eastern looks was removed from the plane.
The only way she's 'zinged' us is that time has passed enough to hide these lawsuits.
The conservatives are the ones who put this crazy system into effect.
WRONG! It is the liberal establishment who is against profiling, not conservatives, and that is why the situation is as it is. Can't say that I'm not a little humored at Estrich and her predicament. It's from the likes of her that we have the policies we have.
1) "A conservative is a liberal who was mugged profiled last night."
2) She's trolling to get racial profiling, so they can
roll it together with 'suppressing minority votes'.
3) She ought to have commented on the advertisement I
saw last night, (sponsored by the ACLU--fancy that!)
that called for repeal of the Patriot Act because
it suppressed civil liberties.
Strangely enough, given her comments, it showed
ordinary Americans, no stereotypical Muslims
or Arabs.
So she was against profiling in searches, before she
was for it for airlines.
No wonder she supports John Kerry!
These laws are for thee, but not for me.
Yes you moron the ACLU does have that much power. And you have created this hell, by being one main advocates for the so called underprivledged.
Dont like waits? maybe get your healthcare as an average Canadian citizen.
In other words, she'd have us deal with airline security in the same manner as, oh let us say, Israel -- with our national interests in mind. Odd for a bunch of Freepers to be agreeing with and applauding Bobblehead Sue. What will we do?
Dang. Susan isn't on the list of writers that you can contact at Newsmax.
Can't ask her "Why not you, Susan?"
:)
I am a 58 year old Yankee, and look it, right down to the Bush for Prez buttons, after going through the getting on the plane security experience, I put a picture of Rosa Parks on my Ice Box. I ain't never flying again.
I totally agree with profiling, but the innocent profilee should be compensated with $10 each time for the inconvienience.
The 10 dollars would be more than saved by fewer security checks, more airline travel, etc.
If she wasn't such a acrid whining drunkard hag, that might have been kind of hot.
You know, I'm kind of sorry for the guard having to do the breast exam. The only thing worse would be having to do "the glove" on Ted Kennedy. ...or Saddaam Hussein. I think I'll quit there. [Puke emoticon...]
Who's good with math/stats? It should be relatively easy to show what a colossal waste of time random searching is, how it is doomed to failure vis-a-vis catching terrorists, needs less to say the lost productivity from endless lines, searches, missed flights, etc. Let's say that there are XX million air passengers every day. There are X number of screeners available to screen and search those passengers. So the maximum available passenger to search ratio is some incredibly low percentage. Now within the demographic construct of those air passengers, some incredibly high percentate---95% or so---could easily be discounted due to any combination of sensible factors....age, American citizenship, ticket status, etc. This leaves 5% of those passengers who have some vector that makes them more selectable, but not in and of themselves makes them "Terrorist-ish"...last minute flight change, one way tickets, paid cash, etc. Some even smaller number of that 5% will have vectors that indicate high relevance to terrorism....ethnic background, citizenship, suspicious behavior, etc. So using simple constructive logic....e.g., terrorists come from countries, they are generally males between 18 and 40 years old, they might exhibit some unusual ticket purchase and itinerary item, they would not be traveling with family members (especially children)...you could simply mandate that 100% of these people be searched to within an inch of their life. EVERY SINGLE SECOND spent searching someone outside of this target group is a second not spent going after the real threats. But our country is to PC to do that. I'm not terribly good with math, but it seems that the random approach---where 80 year old nuns and 4 year old boys are searched....moves the probability of a real target being searched asymptotically towards zero.
Last week my brother and I escorted my 79 yr old father across
the continent to pay a visit to the WWII Memorial. My father
set off alarms at both Sacramento and Dulles airports, not
to mention a few security check points in federal buildings
in DC. After fifty odd years of pain the 'ol man had his hip
replaced eight years ago. He had sustained an injury when
his parachute landed him in a tree while learning to be a
paratrooper in 1943. Old age caught up to him and the metal
detectors revealed his situation. The security folks also
discovered the steel plate in the top of Pop's head, a
momemto he earned via a Japanese bullet while helping to
liberate Manila in 1945.
I had mixed emotions while watching the security personnel
give my father the 'twice over'. On one hand I wanted to
scream at these fools for putting this old combat vet
through this embarassing scene. On the other hand I was
proud of his good natured attitude and how he and all of
us are willing to experience a little inconvenience rather
than hide at home during these dangerous times.
However, I do agree they need to profile... screw political correctness and Zogby says none of the Arabs are voting for POTUS because of his support for Israel, so as I see it that would be win-win.
Unfortunately, the President is so loyal to everyone, he really needs a different Secretary of Transportation. This one is absolutely anti-profiling.
You need to distinguish between arabs and muslims. There are many fine christian arabs I
know.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.