This is perhaps the greatest travesty of all with the TSA strip search scanner/ genital groping protocol. Not only does it violate the travelers most basic human rights. It actually makes us less secure and more vulnerable to terrorism.

No mater what your opinion on the invasiveness of the protocol. Ask yourself. Why did the last TWO serious bombing attempts on US passenger aircrafts fail? For one reason and one reason only. Both terrorists (shoe bomber and panty bomber) did not have a proper detonator for their PETN. What, the shoe bomber was trying to light it with a match and the panty bomber was trying to detonate it by injecting his bomb with a reactive chemical? Both attacks would have undoubtedly been devastating if the perpetrator would have had a simple blasting cap, battery and switch. So why didn't they have a proper detonator? Because it would contain metallic components that are readily detected by decades old metal detectors. Now we have eliminated that proven technology in favor of asinine techniques that are readily defeated by sticking it in your mouth, up your........where the sun don't shine and neither does a strip search scanner, or taking a lesson from hundreds of thousands of drug mules over the last few decades and putting the PETN and detonator in condoms and swallowing it.

Not only are we violated. We are placed at greater risk of terrorism as a side effect.

TSA. Making us less safe than we were before.

I cannot see the video but assume it is Werner Gruber. It turned my mother from the anything for safety crowd into against the scanner. She also asked me why it wasn't seen in US, assuming that it would educate people.

Bad guys in movies are always snapping people's necks with just their hands. That's a real thing, isn't it?

Since the rhetorical question goes to the extreme of no security on one end, it should go to the extreme of ultra security applied on the other, and applied to everyone, not st random, ie full frisks for everyone, bag searches, etc. I wont even go as far as cavity searches I feel pretty confident actually the vast majority would choose the no security option. Ultimately most people will opt for whatever is cheaper and faster.

No, but a belt or a laptop properly employed could seriously harm someone.

Oh duh. I meant that to be in the other thread. Anyway, they're connected.

The battery question is better answered by a lawyer or LEO from that location, as those laws vary from location to location.

Letting a known threat matrix go unscreened because it could be offensive to someone is poor security to begin with. If that is the defining rationale for screening procedures, then all it would take to change most procedures is a handful of like minded individuals going on tv, radio and writing the print media letters and we would be completely unscreened in about 3 months. As soon as we announce "we will never screen x again", that is an avenue that someone wanting to do damage would be able to use unchecked.

I have worked in high security areas many times in my past, and the patdowns that I have done for them were much more intrusive than anything TSA will ever do. If they do not search your collar, that is their choice - again, declining to search a known threat matrix is bad security. Have you ever watched Wild, Wild, West? He carried like a battleship in his collar! (I know, that is an outlandish comparison). When I was in the military, I had tons of things in my collar - a small penknife, 550 cord, a length of wire, and any other number of things (I even had a small screwdrivere and a pair of lockpicks at one time) I thought I might need handy if I was ever caught in a hot zone - want to know why? Because noone, NOONE ever patted down the collar when we were searched. Now, TSA has actually put into effect a search that checks collars, and I was absolutely astounded, becuse noone, NOONE has ever patted down collars.;)

Letting a known threat matrix go unscreened because it could be offensive to someone is poor security to begin with.

So letting a known threat matrix to unscreened is poor security.

Then please explain how TSA with all its wisdom allows body cavity weapons to go unscreened. A body cavity weapon has been deployed exactly as many times as a shoe bomb and an underwear bomb.

Are you suggesting that TSA is guilty of having poor security practices?

And allowing known threat matrices go unscreened is already part of the TSA's SOP



Using a hand held metal detector would allow TSO's to pinpoint areas where any metal is. If the handheld triggered on the hair or collar, OK. If not, there is no reason for the search.

550 cord isn't a prohibited item.


I thought I might need handy if I was ever caught in a hot zone - want to know why? Because noone, NOONE ever patted down the collar when we were searched. Now, TSA has actually put into effect a search that checks collars, and I was absolutely astounded, becuse noone, NOONE has ever patted down collars.;)[/QUOTE]

1. Then why is there a "modified pat-down" (whatever that is) for children under 12?

2. If a threat to aircraft can be concealed in hair, then why isn't everyone's hair checked?

3. "Could be offensive" is not a reasonable description for what TSA is doing. It IS offensive. Any TSO who did the "enhanced pat-down" (or whatever it's called) anywhere else would be in prison. So it boots not to pretend it isn't offensive.

TSA would do better to simply acknowledge this and then make the claim that its offensive conduct is somehow necessary.

1. No one is arguing for NO security. Indeed, there can be no real argument against an effective security regime. However, there are excellent reasons to believe that the TSA is running an ineffective security regime. These reasons start with the humiliation of the last line of defense, which is not the TSA's gate gropers, but rather the passengers themselves.

2. Is this an objection to the First Amendment?

You are right on target. TSA should be setting GYN examination tables at checkpoints as well as tables for rectal exams if we are to accept the quote above. In addition, all passengers should be required to open their mouths so that TSA screeners can insert a finger in the mouth to check for weapons.

Instead, they are running their hands through people's hair, around their collars and in their pants and calling that "security."

Nice post! And the face does not get touched

Yes, it does. I have personally had this done, more than once. Just because you don't personally do it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

How could you possibly know this is the case for every airport and every TSO screen in America?

You can't.

And I will tell you point blank that my forehead has been touched twice while performing a secondary screening.

And before you make some silly claim that the forehead is not really the face, I suggest you click these links:

Definition of "face" from Dictionary.com - See definition 1.

Definition of "face" from Merriam-Webster.com - See definition 1.

Wikipedia entry on "face" - See the first sentence of the entry.

My hair is short and bone straight. In the last two weeks my hair has been stroked at SAT, HOU, and HRL. In my opinion, it is by far the most disgusting part of the groping I received at all three airports. If a screener was actually looking at me for hidden items, it would be obvious that there is absolutely no way anything could be in my hair. In all three cases it was nothing more that the screeners "just following the rules." And we call passengers "sheeples?" I say the true sheeples are the TSA screeners.