Arthur Frommer loves the TSA
 

At the Frommers website, he wrote a passionate defense of the TSA. His stance is pretty much one of how can we forget the lessons of 9/11 and the TSA is keeping us from getting blown out of the sky.

http://www.frommers.com/community/bl...short-memories
"..I thank heaven for the zealousness of the TSA. Every time I am patted down, I am grateful for security agents who take their jobs seriously. I am conscious of the fact that their zealousness is deterring all sorts of would-be terrorists from attempting to carry weapons onto planes. And I am astonished at the shortsighted lack of memory on the part of various newspaper and internet commentators who enjoy the act of ridiculing the TSA.

Thank heaven we at last have a security agency that isn't affected by the profit motive. Thank heaven they are patting down even the most unlikely suspects, in the hope of deterring a terrorist from attempting to avoid their security barriers.
Thank heaven we have an agency that remembers 9/11. .."

Note to self - never trust Frommer's again............

I curse the zealousness of the TSA. Every time they pat down a child, an elderly person with a cane, a cancer survivor or war veteran with a prosthesis, they spit on the graves of the hundreds of thousands - or is it millions - of Americans who have sacrificed their lives over the last 200 years to defend American freedoms. And I am astonished at the shortsighted lack of memory on the part of various paranoid nincompoops who are willing to turn this country into a new version of Nazi Germany or the Communist Soviet Union out of cowardice and fear.

Thank heaven we have a few people in this country who still remember that we have a Constitution and why it was adopted. Thank heaven that at least a few people in this country still remember that it is freedom, not "safety" or "security", that made the United States the greatest country on Earth at one time, and can do so again.

Thank heaven there are still a few people who remember that 9/11 didn't change a damn thing - WE changed it, when we gave in, wholesale, to the fear that the perpetrators of 9/11 instilled in us as a nation.

But if we can find our spines in time, perhaps we can change it back.

Last time Frommer's sees a dime from me... or that I bother to read their blogs or travel info.

Isnt Frommer's target market a bit blue haired (scared of bad guys) and/or the type of person who would go to Europe with three money belts, and on an organized coach trip?

I think of their market as being a truly middle class traveler, perhaps taking the family to see the olde world.

Wait until a TSO grabs Frommer's junk and then let's see how he feels

He already answered you.

I wonder if there is something going on behind the scenes at Frommers. Chris Elliott's trouble shooting column runs there. However, he has also written several pieces that are critical of the TSA which haven't been on Frommers. Coincidence or editorial control?

I don't have anything against Arthur Frommer. I think he is of the WWII vet generation that still basically trusts the government unconditionally.

Frankly, I don't care much for Frommer or his publications. Rarely have I seen anything in Frommer's that is unusual or out-of-the-mainstream. His/his publications pander to the inexperienced & in my opinion have contributed to the throngs of tourists at certain sites and the general bad behavior of tourists (American tourists in particular) at many of the major tourist destinations.

Instead of taking the badly-behaved tourists to task, the pandering continues. Likewise, he won't take the TSA to task because it might (negatively) impact his revenue stream. Frommer is IMHO a sheep that wants zero-risk, and encourages zero-risk for the travels of his readers.

I said "grabs his junk" not simply getting patted down ;). I've been patted down and have had my junk grabbed* and there is a difference.


*and if it's a "good grab", I'll ask the TSO if he enjoyed it as much as I did ;)

Today Arthur frommer posted a blog about the TSA and the response he had from the previous blog piece. Mr. Frommer seems to be unaware that the weapons that the 9/11 hijackers used were not prohibited at the time and therefore the airport security was not negligent in letting those items pass.
http://www.frommers.com/community/bl...ded-restricted

"...It was therefore with astonishment that I read the dozen-or-so negative comments that have been made in response to my recent blog post (scroll down for the comments) in which I discussed the campaign to discredit the TSA, or to replace them with the employees of private, profit-seeking companies, or to force them to discontinue certain security practices (like requiring passenger to take off their shoes and place them on the belt, or to permit passengers to carry large containers of liquid onto flights). See the comment to my blog that states we should "get rid of the body scanners, get rid of the shoe removal, get rid of the liquid restrictions." One wonders what world these strident sorts are living in. Have they never heard of Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber," who concealed explosives in his footwear that were capable of bringing down a plane? Have they never heard of the would-be terrorist who attempted to ignite explosive liquids that he brought onto a plane?..
Do the opponents of the TSA really claim that the calibre of TSA's work force is less impressive than the bored and bumbling types that used to maintain the security gates prior to 9/11 and who permitted the 19 hijackers to pass almost effortlessly onto the planes they later seized?.."

A commenter, IMHO, got it right: "I maintain that what has kept the terrorists from seizing planes in the last 10 years is not the security theater of the TSA (more on that in a second), but the mentality shift we as a society have undergone as a result of 9/11. When a pilot went berserk on a JetBlue plane yesterday, it was the other passengers who subdued him -- as it was the other passengers, not the TSA, who tackled the shoe bomber and prevented him from doing any harm..."

Frommer is an idiot.

Actually, Arthur, NO, I haven't ever heard of a passenger who got liquid explosives aboard a plane and "attempted to ignite them," because it has never happened. The so-called Liquids Bombers were busted long before they ever had their explosives concocted, and long before they ever got near a plane.

Which is lucky for them, since, as far as I can tell from my reading on the net, there is no liquid explosive that is powerful enough to take down a plane that is not also so unstable that it would blow the bomber to bits on the taxi ride to the airport.

Frommer's opinion is clearly based on three foundations:

1) That what TSA is doing is necessary
2) That what TSA is doing is effective
3) That security is more important than freedom

Some security is necessary. Very few people argue otherwise. However, rational people understand there is a point at which additional security is not necessary. The folks, like AF, that blindly chant the mantra "ANYTHING for security" are not rational. This dovetails nicely with the thinking that TSA alone is keeping us safe (when all the evidence suggests otherwise).

Rational people want security to be effective. AF doesn't even address the point. He takes TSA's marketing as gospel. See above.

The third item speaks for itself. Anyone that blindly sacrifices freedom for the illusion of safety is not only a coward, but is an ignorant and irrational one.

Add me to the list of former AF customers.