- @cnnbrk
- Followers: 57,903,757
At least four officers with the St. Louis Police Department in Missouri were struck by gunfire on Monday night, thetwitter.com/i/web/status/1…1F
- @cnnbrk
- Followers: 57,903,757
In Oakland, California, just east of San Francisco, peaceful protesters are being detained and arrested for being otwitter.com/i/web/status/1…9u
- @cnnbrk
- Followers: 57,903,757
Defense officials tell CNN there was growing discomfort among some in the Pentagon even before Trump announced thattwitter.com/i/web/status/1…je
- @cnnbrk
- Followers: 57,903,757
Bishop of the Washington Diocese is outraged over Trump's photo-op, saying his message was antithetical to "everythtwitter.com/i/web/status/1…md
- @cnnbrk
- Followers: 57,903,757
Washington, DC, reported a spike of coronavirus cases, pushing back the city's timetable for moving to the second ptwitter.com/i/web/status/1…ot
- @cnnbrk
- Followers: 57,903,757
RT @CNN: As protests over George Floyd's death continue, more than 17,000 members of the National Guard are standing ready to support local…
- @cnnbrk
- Followers: 57,903,757
Louisville's police chief has been fired after it was discovered that the body cameras of officers potentially invotwitter.com/i/web/status/1…qN
CNN POLITICS ON FACEBOOK » | CNN POLITICS ON TWITTER »
TSA complaints: Warranted outrage? Or all bark, no bite?
In recent weeks there has been growing vocal anger regarding the Transportation Security Administration's procedures relating to pat downs and the use of full-body scanners. But amid all of the noise, what are the real complaints, and how much of the outrage is simply that - a growing chorus of bandwagon anger.
There certainly has been no shortage of horror stories - a shirtless boy receiving a pat down, a flier had to show her prosthetic breast, a bladder cancer survivor whose urine bag broke during a pat down - and countless other stories of uncomfortable encounters with the TSA.
The coverage of the isolated incidents being reported raises the question of whether they paint a picture that isn't the reality for the vast majority of travelers.
The concerns: Fact vs. fiction
Polls have found a majority of Americans support the scans, though they aren't as supportive of the TSA pat downs.
A CBS News survey showed 81 percent of people polled approve of the use of full-body X-ray machines. A Washington Post/ABC News survey found 64 percent of people supported the use of the machines, while 32 percent were opposed. When it comes to the use of pat downs, respondents were practically split down the middle. However, 37 percent of all Americans said they "feel strongly" that the pat downs are overly intrusive. Still 70 percent of Americans questioned in the Washington Post/ABC News poll said the new TSA rules made no difference in their decision to fly.
Our partners at Time.com, who are taking a look at the TSA procedures, report that the head of the agency John Pistole has said the outcry has partially been fueled by media-fed misperceptions. He said that only a “very small percentage” of the 34 million Americans who have flown since the new procedures took effect have been subjected to the pat downs.
Politico: Go ahead, touch my junk
The TSA even released a list of "myths and facts" about pat downs and other security measures.
No doubt passengers still have some concerns. What about their 4th amendment rights? Are the scanners safe? Do they even work? Can they actually stop terror attacks? How far is too far when it comes to a pat down? What are the medical implications of the procedures? And who exactly should be getting the pat downs?
For some, it’s a question of pat down or blown up?
BusinessInsider.com: Sorry, Folks, We'd Rather Be Body-Scanned Than Blown Up In Mid-Air
"It wouldn't be a total oversimplification to boil the issue down to a single question: would you rather get screened or blown up," Time.com's Sora Song wrote. "The new TSA whole-body scanning machines are designed to catch potentially deadly threats — like, say, explosive chemicals in underwear — that metal detectors miss. The end result should be a safer flight. It's a no-brainer."
For all those complaining about the security check hassles, CNN contributor Bob Greene asks, would you rather have no security at all?
"Would you feel safe? Would you want to live in such a country?," he adds.
"You did, if you were a citizen of the United States before the 1970s."
Why all the hoopla?
The firestorm has only grown as close-up photos of the pat downs grace newspaper and website front pages, while the mockery has only grown on late night talk shows, "Saturday Night Live" and YouTube.
And let's not leave the press out of it. Howard Kurtz, writing for the Daily Beast, agrees in part with Pistole that the media are certainly part of the blame.
"From network newscasts to local TV, from newspaper front pages to a blur of web headlines, it seems untold numbers of women are having their breasts touched and untold numbers of men are feeling the intrusive hands of government guards near their packages," he writes. "Actually, that’s far from true."
And when it comes down to it, Kurtz said, part of the media attention is due to how easy the story is to tell - and that it has all the makings of the perfect press story.
"The narrative combines a number of elements: Hassled airline passengers (who can’t relate to that?); terrorism concerns; invasion of privacy, and a hint of sexual naughtiness," he said. "But the key here is that every local news outlet in America could send a reporter or a crew to a nearby airport and grab a piece of the action."
Then there's the whole "National Opt-Out Day" issue. It could either, as some organizations suggest, delay flights or completely fizzle out. As Time.com points out, it might just turn into a "More Like Opting Out Of Making Your Flight" scenario?
On Twitter
THIS LOOKS LIKE A SCEENE FROM THE MOVIE TOTAL RECALL. MOVIES SHOW US WHAT THE GOVERMENT HAVE IN PLAN FOR US IN THE FUTURE. AND THE MEDIA DOING THEIR PART TO BRAIN WASH US AND ACCEPT THE TOTAL RECAL SCANERS.
Ever heard of Rekall? They sell those fake memories.
In 10 years and 2 billion people flying, 3000 died due to terrorist related incidents. The majority of those in the ground. In 2003 alone, 42,000 people were killed by Car Accidents. 63% of those were not wearing seat belts. That's almost TEN TIMES the number of people killed by air-terroism in just 1 year. If those statistics held steady, that would be 100 times the number of people killed by air-terrorism.
Why aren't we deploying TSA checkpoints with the nude-o-scopes everywhere to make sure people are wearing their seatbelts? Because getting killed in a car accident isn't as boogey man scary as plummeting 30,000 feet to your death with nothing to do about it. It's 100% fear, 0% logic.
Does all airport employees get the same *public* pat down as the passengers everytime they enter the airport? And why does the pilots want to be exempt from it? If we can't treat everyone the same, then we better look at alternative.
That's now. In an hour, he could have total recall
Well Billy has a point. Perspective. And I always had the same mindset with 9/11 – totally emotional response to invade Iraq and kill 600,000 of their citizens over an incident in which our tobacco companies similarly kill 3000 people in one day. So why didn't we close down the tobacco lobby and industries with the same gusto? Because to kill for your prophet is evil, but to kill for your profit is good business.
Please don't get on my flight if you don't go through full body scan or pat down.
Not only that- THEY CAUSE CANCER!!! CAUSE BIRTH DEFECTS.... MESS UP EGGS, SPERM.... Why else do you think that they lay that lead apron over girls and boys genitals at the dentist or emergency room when they are X-rayed? This is common knowledge. Why are people not extrapolating this information and refusing these scans? I personally will not fly until this nonsense is over. THIS IS TERRORISM!! Stop trying to say that you are protecting me TSA. This won't help do anything but line the company's pockets who are making these machines and increase the already large percentage of the GDP generated by cancer treatement.
I think as we all stand in line for our body scan we should hum the burlesque strip song as people go through the scanner.
Replying to Billy: Well said and EXACTLY what Americans SHOULD be focusing on! Remember the myth that the GOVERNMENT never lies, right? Seem to remember reading that these scans WERE NOT being saved either! http://www.mainstreet.com/article/moneyinvesting/news/feds-admit-saving-body-scans?puc=outbrain&cm_ven=outbrain&obref=obnetwork
Believe in the Tooth Fairy and Santa, too? WHERE DO WE DRAW THE LINE?????
Richter,
See you at the party.
There are not checkpoints for cars because someone driving a car cannot kill 3,000 people in a matter of seconds. It is easily done with a large commerical airplane.
All of this reminds me more of the scene in Airplane where the equipment at the airport shows the bare breast of women boarding the plane to the people monitoring it while they let people with bazookas pass through.
The ONLY "evidence" that these machines cause cancer or birth defects or anything else is an opinion letter from a group of California doctors. Unless and until someone can show a real risk of harm, like a peer reviewed study, the idea that scanners are EVIL and DANGEROUS and CAUSE CANCER is unsupported hysteria.
And yes, I've used them, and yes, I'd do it again.
TOUCH IT AND WATCH IT GROW, BETTER YET KISS IT...
@ TS – 1 plane couldn't kill 3000 people either unless it was very, very lucky. Keep in mind that 9/11 was a coordinated, multi target attack. Tower 1 had 1400 lives lost in the tower plus 83 passengers. Tower 2 had 600 lives lost plus 53 passengers. Timmothy McVeigh killed 168 with 1 truck. In the end, does it really matter if its 1000 people in 1 instant, when 40,000 more die over time?
One thing I'd like to see the Media report more of is that this 'Underwear Bomber"s father called and warned the USA that he believed his son was about to pull off a scheme like this. The "authorities" did not act on his information. Now we have scanners that attempt to locate explosives in underwear. It also seems to have dropped off of the media radar that experts don't believe that the new scanning technologies can even pick up PETN in underwear.
Parker + Spitzer have it right when they say that we are puppet and let the terrorists play the puppet masters (with HSD and TSA as strings)
Otherwise, all my preffered media (slate, NYT, CNN) are playing the same TSA-friendly tune (and get roughted up by their public). I am extremly disappointed
@T S One car (truck) packed with fertilizer an fuel completely took out the FBI building in Atlanta, killing 168 people. Had the bomb been better placed and larger, that number could be many times greater. Just because a plane flies doesn't necessarily make it exponentially worse than a terrorist driving. You could pack a truck full of explosives and drive into certain areas of any sports arena in this country and take out thousands.
@ T S, sorry Oklamhoma, not Atlanta. Atlanta just suffers from bad sports teams. 🙂
Check your source, or at least don't date yourself by using data that has been dismissed. CBS and Washington Post retook that poll, which has dropped to 60%, and closer to 50% for those who actually travel once a year. Additionally, close to 40% feel the pat downs go too far.
This is already been released, and news stories have run on ABC and the Post.
Unless you are pushing an agenda, please take the time to update your information to be accurate.
I'll explain later. You've been bugged and they're tracking you. They're gonna bash down your door in three minutes unless you do exactly as I say.
I believe that you will find that all of the suspects in the 'bombing' scares boarded planes OUTSIDE
I believe that you will find that all of the suspects in the 'bombing' scares boarded planes OUTSIDE the U.S. So why is it so important to subject American citizens to intrusive body searches when the perpetrators don't originate here? Anyone care to explain???????????
I don’t care either way about pat downs. I've gotten one. Very non-invasive. But you all knew that right? And the guys who flew the planes into those towers, hear about that one? They boarded inside the USA. So,continue your argument
It seemed the article was slanted.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20023682-503544.html
New, more recent polls, which are hardly as accepting.
No wonder you're having nightmares. You're always watching the news.
THANKS! I KNEW that poll was bogus – it's nice to see some more truthful results.
I'm very tired of the "don't like it - don't fly" statements that are made. There are no alternatives when you need to go thousands of miles in a number of hours. Interestingly, I don't think any of these new measures would have prevented 9/11 to begin with (just steal a knife from a first-class flyer). So now we're all presumed criminals until proven otherwise. I have a better idea - Not comfortable with less-than-Gestapo security? Then YOU don't fly. I'd be happy with a simple metal detector and a few thousand armed Air Marshalls flying with us.
My 80 year old mother was strip searched because of cancer leaving her with an artificial breast. They put it on a counter and pressed it to make sure there was no bomb.....some common sense would be helpful in these searches. They kept apologizing to her the entire time.
look at the woman they are patting down....she is skin and bones....how in the world could she have anything on her...ridiculous...OPT OUT......OPT OUT.............OPT OUT
I love the idea that the TSA is the only effective airport security option out there, that its TSA or Death! If you think any security check can be justified by fear, I say hold on to that thought when they start with the next phase in 2011. China and Singapore dont do security checks this way and I dare Bob Greene to tell me those countries have 'no security at all'.
Please state the street and number
TSA is not the only option. Since 2003, every airport is allowed by law to choose private security over TSA screeners.
If we allow our government to erode our freedoms, we will have no freedoms and the terrorists will have won.
Dude, the TERRORISTS HAVE ALREADY WON!
Where were you when Bush started wiretapping our phones?
If we don't allow the government to "erode our freedoms," the terrorists will blow our planes out of the sky.
Haven't you heard? Listening in on potential terrorists' phone calls is intrusive! Asking someone at a traffic stop if they are here legally is harrassment! This is a free country, you know. Now, feeling up your grandma before she gets on an airplane is just another safety measure. Who knows what she might be smuggling on board an aircraft? GEEZ! What are some people smoking? Do you hear yourselves? Are you for this because you actually think it makes you feel better or is it because it the Obama administration is in charge? Did you gripe about the Patriot Act and yet don't have a problem with the pat down?
Anyone who submits to a strip search (via these machines) or a full-body manual search by a Government Official WITHOUT a warrant is allowing his or her 4th Ammendment rights to be removed. Period. To all who are just fine with that: If your liberty is so cheaply bought with a little bit of fear then you don't deserve it to begin with.
The way I see it is, if you have nothing to hide, why are you worried about being searched? If you are here legally, why are you worried about a police officer asking people for their ID? If you are not a terrorist, why are you worried about someone tapping your phone? If a bomb is discovered by a TSA screening, if an illegal alien is deported, and if a terrorist is caught as a result of wire tapping, the U.S. is a safer place.
Drew: I DO have something to hide – that's why I wear clothes! Oh, and I'd get arrested if I didn't (Ironic, isn't it?)
CNN you suck. The CBS poll you mentioned only had a sample of slightly over 1,000 people which cannot represent the whole damn county. How can 1k people represent 300 million? They can't! The people who don't care either way never fly, hence why they are ok with the new procedures. TSA hasn't stopped squat. All they do is prove that the terrorists are winning. By having everyone in this state of fear and by stripping our liberties away the terrorists have won. I'd rather be free and risk dying then be safe and a slave!
I fly multiple times per year (5 so far and one more time to go before Christmas) and I find nothing objectionable about the security measures. I'd rather be "strip" searched than get blown up.... I actually flew the day that they found the bombs on the UPS planes and was headed to the Philly airport which happened to be one of the destinations of the planes with the bombs. I definitely choose a minor inconvenience of getting a pat down (and yes I've had one before) over being dead any day.
Sorry John, YOU Suck. Sincerely, CNN.
John:
Take a statistics class. You have no idea what you're talking about. 1000 random samples is a good enough population for a low margin of error. Every poll reports its margin of error. 10,000 random samples is about all you'd ever need for any population size with a very low margin of error.
The trick is getting truly random samples.
Dear Dandy –
Those bombs were found in the cargo area of the plane not on board where the passengers were sitting. Your safety is bogus and frisking grandma won't catch a terrorist. While she's getting patted down, the true terrorist will be walking right on through.
These are the sort of people TSA hires?
http://www.ajc.com/news/clayton/hartsfield-tsa-worker-allegedly-751953.html
You should read about the felons we recruit in the military who go on to create new terrorists by raping, murdering and torturing innocent people.
As someone who flies weekly, I say "pat me down, scan me, do whatever it takes in this CRAZY world so I can get where I need to be safely." I say bring the EL AL folks here to straighten out the security process. Then you'll see how easy the scanners and pat-downs are.
So you think this is about security? Picture this. It's the day before Thanksgiving. You are waiting in line to get your pat-down or scan, choose your poison. Anyhoo....how many people would say is around? 200? 300? As you approach the security checkpost, BAAAMMMM!!!! The guy behind you just set off a pound of C4, taking you and everyone within ear shot to meet your maker. This is not about security. This is about money. And I for one will choose not to buy into a false sense of security.
You are making a logical mistake - you have assumed that these security procedures actually make you safer. Shouldn't you require proof of that before giving up your freedoms? Taking away that assumption you are basically saying: "I'm fine with the government taking naked pictures of me and molesting me (as well as all of my fellow citizens) for no gain at all". So let's examine the assumption that they make you safer: it is TRIVIALLY easy to still sneak explosive materials onto a plane. You can put it in a body cavity. You can even swallow some stuff and then regurgitate or pass it later. Your beloved scanners and pat downs won't help in either case.
Fricsaid...your scenario could happen at any mall, post office, traffic jam, amtrak or subway. That's not the point, and it has zip to do with money. The point is taking 'airplanes as missles' out of the terrorist's handbook–THAT'S what it's for; if malls start getting bombed or sports venues, then I guarantee you'll start seeing metal detectors there also. Current airport security is directly the result of 9/11, nothing more. Don't like it, don't fly–very easy choice.
El Al spends $100 million a year to secure 37 airplanes, that type of security will never happen here; too many passengers and too many planes.
Hey Jim, if that were the case, why didn't they start doing this on 09/12/01? And the malls, etc. are very good examples. Why do you insist on being safe in the air, but not on the ground? And in my opinon, it is about money. Do you think it's by chance that Michael Chertoff is a major stock holder in Rapiscan, the company that makes these machines. Nine years ago, terrorist did not make me fear flying. Exploding underwear did not make me fear flying. Our own government forces me to choose not to fly. Not by fear, but because what is happening is not right. The day a half naked boy, being patted down in an airport full of strangers hit's the internet for the world to see is a sad day. And if you think this is acceptable, I have no choice but to question your mentality.
I would assume that there are ALWAYS one off situations in which a routine procedure such as this may seem out of line. But that is probably .0000004% of the time. Honestly – let's move on with life – this is not what we should be reading out everyday. There are people being murdered every minute, starving children, homeless people out in the cold, broken families, etc. Anyone flying should be thankful to be so fortunate – let's thankful for everything God gave us, and stop making a mountain out of a mole hill.
By letting things like this slide we lose our freedoms. If we don't stand up for ourselves against the government who will? You think they will protect us and look out for us?! They just wnat to make money and stay in power.
Let's just create a seperate Airline for the people who want to whine about the security measures. You (and anyone else) can board the plane. No searches, no xrays, no medal detectors, nothing. You won't have to worry about a thing......
Yeah, because people who don't want to be groped are against all other security measures, too–right? Get real. Nobody's saying there should be no screening. But groping little old ladies and kids isn't going to stop someone from getting on board with a bomb up his butt. I say start a new airline for people who are so scared they're willing to let TSA do anything they want to make sure they're "safe". In order to board, you have to strip naked, have a colonoscopy, and a complete MRI.
Nathan, I think more respect should be paid to those that stand up for their rights. I don't call them whiners. I call them Americans. We wouldn't have the freedom we have today if not for people "standing up" for what they feel is right.
@Nathan... "Let's just create a seperate Airline for the people who want to whine about the security measures. You (and anyone else) can board the plane. No searches, no xrays, no medal detectors, nothing. You won't have to worry about a thing...."
I'll take the airline where people don't touch my junk or grope my 13 year old (because 12 is too young, but 13 isn't?)... Where's that airline? I'll take my chances with them. If you want to travel on an airline that anally probes you, be my guest because that's next.
Nathan, I'm with you! Four legs good, two legs better! Four legs good, two legs better! Baaaaaaa!
Stop crying people - if you don't want the pat down, just go through the scanner. It's ridiculous that you are complaining when you CAN go through the scanner. If you don't like either - take the bloody Train or Drive! But shut up - it's not
I fully support the TSA – it's for all our safety.
Maybe some people don't like having strangers photograph there naked bodies. And if your naughty bits are too blurry on the scanner you get the hands on treatment anyway even though you've been through the scanner. That's what happened to Dave Berry and who knows how many other people who simply weren't famous enough to get on the news when they were violated.
sarah michele: ok...if you dont mind if the cops search your car, house, office, purse, desk, shoes luggage and trunk and read your text messages and get a copy of your phone bill to see every call youve med...every time you pass a certain intersection...them by all means you are right..I suspect uou would not agree or like any of the invasive, unwarranted use of power over private citizens...Lets see how many time you drive by that intersection....hopefully its not the ONLY intersection you can choose from...Get it now???
Amen!! If we took all the time spent complaining on this and put that time somewhere else, imagine what we could accomplish!
My "amen" was meant for Sarah. Sarah – totally agree with you girl.
Gort01–apples and oranges!! The security at airports is ONLY involving the choice to fly...period, and it's in response to the horrors of 9/11; no one is having thugs knocking down their doors or having their cars searched–nothing but sheer paranoia to even suggest that. We have tight security at airports for a very solid reason, and if you don't like it, take the train or drive. No one 'has' to fly–it's a choice.
The TSA about safety? They are next to useless. What have they actually stopped since their inception? Someone tell me! What they stopped dangerous nail clippers and shampoo bottles from getting on board? They do not make us safe at all!
Gort101 – are you serious? This is a perfect example of how this is being blown WAY out of proportion. Thank you for proving my opinion right with your way overdramatic comment.
Gort01, cops cannot stop you randomly in public or come to your house and search your things without probable cause. But you are CHOOSING to go to privately run airport and CHOOSING to fly on a privately run airline. As far as your text messages go, the government is already illegally reading those. Where were you to complain about that when the whole warrant-less wiretapping thing went down??? It is unfortunate that many folks like you do not have a clear grasp of what our rights actually are, and when they are really being infringed upon.
Sarah, with all due respect, standing of for what you believe in, (this is what you call crying). has provided us with many of the freedoms that you get to experience today. And if you think this whole mess is about security, you might want to keep a keen eye open in the airport before you go thru your scan or pat down. You see, the thousands of people in the airport are targets.....no differnt than being on an airplane. Hey, that guy over there in the line at Starbucks.....he looks a little shady.
John, check the facts–TSA has NOT just confiscated nail clippers–they have found knives, guns (some plastic that get by traditional metal detectors), and several other dangerous items. Laura, right on. I'll never get on a plane that doesn't have this kind of screening.
And just how much are you willing to accept before you've realized your 4th amendment rights are no longer being respected? All of this is because some dude hid explosives in his underwear. If he found explosives small enough to fit inside his undies, then what's to stop me from stashing the same amount of explosives in my lady bits? You prepared to handle a cavity search and/or full-scale pelvic exam every time you fly for reasons of "safety?"
I cannot help but to find it amazing that people cite something that happened over 9 years ago.
So, when they start doing cavity search's because the scanners don't pick that up, are you going be first in line for a cavity search? How degrading...
I have nothing to hid, they can search me or stop me anytime. I'm glad they are being thorough.
I bet you you would have a great supporter of the of the guards in 1936 Germany.
Glenn – that comparison doesn't even make sense. Ridiculous.
CNN is only deluding themselves. They can an act like nobody really cares that the TSA blantly violates the 4th amendment with invasive techno-strip searches and pat downs that approach molestation, but the reality won't change just because they refuse to acknowledge it.
Mike ward:
Because you believe in the tooth fairy and Santa Claus does not mean that the rest of us must do so as well!!!
STFU, dude
Sorry Mike, but the 4th amendment argument has already been through federal court and roundly rejected several times; it's a choice to fly, and if you fly, you get searched...period...it's right on the terms and conditions of your ticket in black and white. No 4th amendment issue here at all, because flying is a voluntary choice. Like if you go into a federal building, a condition of choosing to do so is that you agree to being searched–it's your voluntary choice to go there.
Anthony: you should STFU, since you are obviously a traitor that wants to throw away our fundamental rights.
Jim, sorry but you are wrong. Just plain wrong. There have been numerous Supreme Court decisions affirming our right to travel, including flying.
SJErik, you have a right to "travel". You don't have a "right" to show up at a privately run airport and fly on a privately owned plane.
HI;
you are being lied to and mislead. I live in Nice (American) and go to 5+ airports a month here in Europe. The TSA Chief is misinforming you about how you are safe from "External threats". YOU DO NOT TAKE SHOES OFF HERE, and YOU DO NOT GET HARD PAT DOWNS.
America needs to "wake up" and start instructing its "leaders" on what to do, instead of following like good sheep. USA needs only to implement the same security the KSA has for entry, RIGOROUS VISA APPLICATION APPROVALS!
EVERY TERRORIST OR ATTEMPTED IN THE USA COUDL HAVE BEEN STOPPED WITH BETTER VISA PROCESSES>
Regards,
Jon