Posted on 12/06/2004 2:52:00 PM PST by Angry Republican
Helen Chenoweth-Hage had a simple request. The former Idaho Congressman had been pulled aside at the Boise Airport for secondary screening to include a physical pat-down. Chenoweth-Hage had sailed through the metal detector without problem, but TSA officials wanted to scrutinize her some more.
The former Congressman simply asked to see the regulations that permitted TSA officials to pat her down. They refused. And she refused to allow them to pat her down. So they booted her off her flight.
Incidents like this have happened so many times that it is beyond absurd. The regulations of TSA, which should stand for "Thousands Standing Around," are cloaked in secrecy. In this case, a 66-year old former Member of Congress is told to submit to further scrutiny for reasons of political correctness and to inflate inspection numbers.
According to aviation industry sources, the TSA intentionally targets individuals for further scrutiny not because they pose a threat, but because their profiles fit those the least likely to complain. Groups getting extra scrutiny include government employees and the military. Other national security threats reportedly requiring further scrutiny in the past include former Vice President Al Gore and longtime Congressman John Dingell.
The two-part problem is this. First, inspecting people who clearly do not pose a threat distracts attention from those who could pose a threat. Second, the notion that TSA can subject the public to regulations that are not made public is ludicrous. It's like citing a motorist for speeding with the speed limit signs all covered.
The Transportation Security Administration has not provided real and responsible security to our nation's airlines and airports. Playing hide and seek with the regulations and subjecting innocents to absurd inspections in the name of political correctness is simply a waste of time and money.
And that's the Point.
I'm Mark Hyman.
"Wait. That will be coming soon."
You wish.
There was a movie called Airplane which had an old lady being slammed against the wall while obvious terrorists waltzed through the checkpoint. We considered that funny then. Nowadays the PC folks like you think it's the way it should be. You've confused the enemy all right. You think it's us.
BUMP to that.
Thanks for that bit of wisdom injected into the hysteria about the so-called horror of a TSA checkpoint! LOL!
I swear some folks are so paranoid they should never leave their house, much less fly on an jet, post 9-11!
I have a good friend who is German and a molecular biologist who used to attend an islamic center. He said some things that made me wonder if he was BSing me or not about al queda recruiting people who don't fit the profile with science degrees.
Thanks for the reply. I hope that's true, but I've heard that 'pat-downs" are more personal than they were the last time that I flew. There are places where I allow only my husband's hands.
If rights are going to be violated then lets start at the root of the problem not with millions of honest citizens.
Deport any non-citizen who is a mudslime. Screw their rights. I am tired of allowing the government to little by little, day by day infringing upon our rights so that a people that do not deserve to take a breath of USA air can live here plotting to eliminate us.
I am glad the likes of the RINOs and CINOs lurking on the FR did not have their say in the founding of this country.
That's a really stupid analogy. First, last time I went through an airport there was a big sign telling everyone their rights with respect to searches of person and property. The TSA has no more of an obligation to post or distribute the specific regulations than the Dept. of Motor Vehicles has to post a copy of the Vehicle and Traffic Law to the speed sign or the LEO has obligation to give you a copy of the law when he pulls you over.
"People are being jailed for violating secret laws."
Name these people.
after reading your responses on this thread and your FR born on day I would say ... you are too
I don't fly on commercial flights.
I would rather walk than:
1. Be subjected to an search without a warrant.
2. Fly on an system which has a poor record of catching dangerous people and has no fallback position when their pseudo-random searches don't work.
US carriers are terror traps just waiting to happen. And rather than press for real security, you and your ilk can keep defending the indefensible.
And when another plane gets hijacked, I'm going to blame you as part of the problem.
Oh I see, you are all worried about some freak from Cal turning Muslim, yet our borders are an endless conga-line of people entering our country illegally by the MILLIONS, while women and ol men are being scanned, sniffed, x-rayed, groped and searched at the local airport. Hehehe.
"BWHAHAHAHAHA...
Look for punk rockers to start blowing up greedy marts."
BWHAHAHAHAHA...
Never heard of John Walker Lind or Richard Reed, eh? You don't get out much, do you?
Perhaps the news channel she watches failed to describe the regulation in sufficient detail to understand where the authority to do pat-downs comes from.
Does the TSA have the authority to do body cavity searches with cold instruments?
Most of the Orwellian intrusions we are allowing could be eliminated by allowing pilots to go armed and allowing airlines to compete for business by deciding for themselves what is necessary to keep their planes in the air.
September 11th was certainly a terrible tragedy. But it does not justify the loss of all freedom. I choose not to fly because I don't like the trade-off.
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.