The Audacity of Grope

As columnist Charles Krauthammer pointed out, Americans have taken to a new slogan which neatly encapsulates their consternation regarding airport security. It was inadvertently coined by John Tyner, a 31-year-old software programmer from Oceanside, California. When he refused to allow a Transportation Security Administration official to administer a pat-down near his private area, he uttered a phrase which has resonated nationwide: ”You touch my junk, and I’m going to have you arrested.” Yet as a Senate hearing on Wednesday indicated, the TSA is not backing down. TSA administrator John Pistole says he is sensitive to privacy concerns but insists that “government must provide the best possible security for air travelers.” Thus, the inevitable question: is this the best possible security government can provide? It is hard to reach that conclusion when one considers the salient issues surrounding the controversy.

The first issue would be terrorist creativity and determination. We now remove our shoes at the airport because terrorist Richard Reed smuggled a shoe bomb onto a jetliner shortly after 9/11. We are also forbidden to bring certain amounts of liquids with us in response to the 2006 “liquid bomb” plot against at least 10 airliners traveling from the UK to the US and Canada. And now Americans are forced to deal with invasive pat downs and full body scans in response to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s attempt to bring down Northwest Airline flight 253 on Christmas day in 2009, by hiding a bomb in his underwear.

Yet what if terrorists emulate Abdullah Asieri, who attempted to assassinate Saudi Prince Mohammed Bin Nayef, head of Saudi Arabia’s counter terrorism operations, with a bomb that reportedly evaded airport security because it was planted in the terorrist’s rectum? Subsequent forensics revealed that the bomb was not a rectal device but the same bomb used by Abdulmutallab. Drug smugglers frequently attempt to hide contraband in body cavities. Does anyone seriously think a suicide bomber would hesitate to do the same thing? One thing is certain: the same public that is outraged over full-body scans and pat-downs will never submit to a “routine” body cavity search. More importantly, if these types of bombs are virtually undetectable, doesn’t that make a complete mockery of the current procedures?

The second issue is our apparent determination to ignore the most successful airport security strategy currently in use. Israelis have a far more effective and far less invasive and time-consuming system. Why? Because it is the exact opposite of ours: in America the focus is on finding an explosive device. In Israel, the focus is on finding the person carrying the explosive device. Each passenger passes through several layers of security, and each layer is manned by people looking for unusual behavior. Lines are staggered to prevent creating large bunches of people who might be targeted by a terrorist who has gotten into the terminal. In addition, each airport is equipped with a blast-proof luggage screening area, complete with “bomb boxes” which can be used by screeners if they encounter a suspicious piece of luggage.

These bomb-proof areas serve another purpose as well. By isolating luggage in such an area, it no longer becomes necessary to evacuate an entire terminal if something proves suspicious, something which could take several hours. Only the people in the screening area need to move — and only a few meters away.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But the most important part of the equation is summed up by Rafi Sela, the president of AR Challenges, a global transportation security consultancy:

They’re not looking for everything they look for in North America. They just look at you. Even today with the heightened security in North America, they will check your items to death. But they will never look at you, at how you behave. They will never look into your eyes … and that’s how you figure out the bad guys from the good guys.

The third issue is the insistence that the federal government control airport security. It may seem like an odd question to ask with regard to airport security, but why is the federal government thirteen trillion dollars in debt? Because there are few direct consequences for government officials behaving irresponsibly. If a TSA agent allows a terrorist on a plane and that plane blows up, maybe the agent will be fired and most likely the government — meaning taxpayers — will be sued for damages. If airlines themselves are responsible for security, they would be incentivized to provide the best security available for a simple reason: failure on their part could bankrupt the company. Airlines would also likely compete with each other to provide the best combination of security coupled with minimal intrusion and inconvenience in order to maximize their market share. And the cost of that security would be borne by the people it is keeping secure, instead of taxpayers.

Right now we have the worst of all possible worlds: a one-size-fits-all bureaucracy, angering flyers who are necessary to keep the airline industry solvent, costing far more than privatizing the system would cost.

The fourth issue is legal: there isn’t anything in the Constitution which suspends one’s right to resist “unreasonable searches and seizures” without “probable cause” simply because one has decided to fly. This issue will be adjudicated soon enough, as lawsuits have been filed against the TSA and the matter is headed to court.

The fifth issue is health. According to the TSA, “a single scan using backscatter technology produces exposure equivalent to two minutes of flying on an airplane.” Yet there is also another kind of machine which uses millimeter wave technology to scan passengers. Millimeter wave technology is as “harmless as radio waves,” according to their manufacturer, L-3 Security and Detection Systems. Why doesn’t the TSA rely strictly on the more harmless technology? “TSA competitively bids technologies and makes selections through a comprehensive research, testing and deployment process,” said Kristin Lee, a spokeswoman for the agency. “Technologies must meet detection standards, and T.S.A. tests these technologies in both laboratory and field environments.”

Perhaps that is the truth. Or perhaps, as Rep. John J. Duncan Jr., former Chairman of the House Aviation Subcommittee pointed out, something more suspicious is afoot. Mr. Duncan revealed that “former secretary of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, represents Rapiscan, the company which is selling these scanners to his former department,” and that ”far too many federal contracts are sweetheart, insider deals” where “companies hire former high ranking federal officials, and then magically, those companies get hugely profitable federal contracts.” He also noted that “there is already plenty of security at the airport, but now we are going to spend up to $300 million to install 1,000 scanners.”

Finally, the last issue is ideological. Is this intrusive system absolutely necessary to improve airport security, or merely a means to avoid the kind of passenger profiling some Americans consider politically incorrect? The entire world is well aware of the fact that the overwhelming number of terrorist attacks are committed by Muslim males between the ages of 17 and 45. That reality may be inconvenient, but it is a reality nonetheless. There is little question that the overwhelming majority of Americans would prefer the behavioral profiling that the Israelis do at least, (and likely the overall profiling of the aforementioned demographic at most), over the inconvenience and humiliation of a policy in which every flyer is deemed “equally suspicious.” Many Americans also worry that the current ramp-up of airport security is a slippery slope: if airports can be turned into de facto totalitarian zones, why not train and bus stations, or even shopping malls, using the same rationale?

In conclusion, terrorists will continue to look for ways to breach airline security, and there is no doubt that we must stay ahead of the curve. There is also little question that all measures undertaken to provide security require some tradeoff with respect to liberty. How much of a tradeoff? If public reaction is any indication, the TSA has overstepped its bounds.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps the Obama administration might want consider one other factor: after a “shellacking” in the 2010 election, due in large part to their tone-deafness regarding the economy, do they really want to be held responsible for decimating the airline industry by completely alienating its customer base?

The terrorists on 911 had the weapons already on the planes.

Inducing tumors by radiation protects people from terrorists
Groping genitals of young girls protects them from terrorists
Taking and storing nude pictures of nude children protects them from terrorists
Competition is communistic, right-wing, and evil
Obstructing Congress regarding Terrorists in the Homeland is "Transparency"
Giving Financial Help to America’s Enemies is Just Good Sense
Controlling All Foods and Additives give Americans Choice
Transferring Healthcare $$$ of Americans to bankers (with kickbacks to Congress and Obama) is a Double-Plus-Good
Destroying Small business is Double Plus Good
Everything bad is still “Bush’s Fault”
Freed terrorists deserve welfare, healthcare, college, and taxpayer funded IVF
Medical Records Held by the State is Privacy
Rationing Healthcare Creates Jobs
Better Healthcare for US Officials is Wonderful
A Two-tiered Tax System favoring Politicians is Fair
Eliminating US Military Capacity is Increasing Strength
Freed, Armed Terrorists Make for Improved American Safety
War is Peace (*)
Freedom is Slavery (*)
Ignorance is Strength (*)

We could never use the Israeli security system here—it would require well trained highly intelligent TSA agents—no exceptions allowed.

Our liberties are infringed because TSA hires too many idiots—in DC and in the field.

We could never use the Israeli security system here—it would require well trained highly intelligent TSA agents—no exceptions allowed.

A keen point.

Government is in the business of reducing all issues to the lowest common denominator. This is based on the belief that the simplest and most universal tactic is the most easily duplicated.

If we are going to have 50,000 TSA agents requirements for hiring must be limited to anyone with the ability to draw breath, period.

Training must be to do whatever reinforces the ability of the agent to function - voyeurism, assault, et al. This appeal to the basest instinct of employees gets them to work each day.

Imagine waking up knowing that today you will be able to - oh, never mind.

"Former Orlando TSA officer gets probation in sex-slave case
A former Orlando TSA security officer arrested for allegedly molesting a minor pleaded
no contest to one charge today and was sentenced to 10 years' sex-offender probation.
A victim told deputies Bennett asked her to be his sex slave
and fondled her against her will."

Sadeq Naji Ahmed - the Transportation Security Administration
hired him as an airport screener after the Air Force kicked him out for making
statements supporting Osama bin Laden and praising the 9/11 attacks.
Ahmed worked almost a year before enough people at the TSA found that
he previously had his security clearance revoked and had to let him go.

"SCARY But Ignored: Terrorist Spies Successfully Infiltrated Top Classified US Cyber-Files
in March, a TSA employee was allowed to remain at his computer-
and inserted a virus-after he knew his TSA employment was terminated."

"USB Stick May Have Contributed to Deadly Plane Crash
A corrupted USB stick contributed to Spain's worst air disaster on record,
according to a 12,000-page report cited by the Spanish newspaper El Pais and USA Today.
It was initially believed that the crash of Flight 5022 that killed 154 people in 2008
was the result of pilot error, but investigators have now concluded that
a computer infection spread through an infected USB stick may have contributed to the crash."

"Are External USB Drives a Target for Espionage?"

I don’t know what they are bitching about. On November 4, 2008 the voters went to the polls and by a majority of votes said, we want change. Well they got it! now they are crying. This grope and poke is just another installment of the hope and change that the traitors voted for.

As for us that did not vote for change. when it rains, the rain falls on the juas as well as the unjust.

Where the hell did this Pistole idiot come from? Is there no end to the arrogant, marxist morons who surround EmperorObama?!

I tell you, the meteor strike cannot come soon enough...

Listening to the ever humorous Mark Steyn yesterday helped me come up with this idea:

We all know what a disaster Obamacare care will be, making it more and more difficult to see a doctor.

Let’s issue every TSA employee a medical license.

Then they won’t be groping us, they will be examining us.

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.