Choosing Between X Rays And Body Searches
Would you like a large dose of radiation in an x-ray machine that takes nude pictures of your body? How about a state-imposed groping that would be considered criminal if not authorized by the federal government? Travelers through our nations airports are increasingly being forced to make this choice as the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) deploys more and more backscatter X-ray machines at airports across the country. According to critics, you can’t win. You are either irradiated with x-rays far more than is necessary, or healthy, at the same time that an image of your naked body is perused by a TSA employee, or you are subject to an invasive, groping body-pat-down search – a search that some have likened to a sexual assault that would land the perpetrator in prison if he or she did not wear a TSA uniform. This is not to even mention that these same procedures, nude x-rays and intense, physically-touching body searches, are not limited to adults but applied to children as well.
A common, ordinary, everyday traveler named John Tyner recently became an internet sensation after posting on Youtube audio recorded by his cell phone of his interaction with TSA authorities at the San Diego airport after refusing to go through the backscatter machine or be groped by a TSA employee. But he is not alone, as many others have taken up the cause in recent days, including pilots, pilot unions, other airline employees, and advocacy groups from both the Left and the Right.
The TSA defends the invasive probes as a necessary defense against the terrorist threat in this day and age. They claim their safeguards make flying safer for everyone, whether it is an inconvenience or not. Critics say their measures are unnecessary and ineffective, and in fact an unconstitutional invasion of privacy.
The greater question of concern is where does a country, or a society, draw the line between public safety and individual rights? This balancing act is like walking the edge of a knife. Tip too far one way and the people lose their freedoms to an ever-increasingly powerful central government and are destroyed from within. Tip too far the other way and the society opens itself up wide for attack by terrorists and extremists eager to exploit the weaknesses inherent in a free society and is destroyed from without. Statesman Benjamin Franklin succinctly stated it this way: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
Where do the nude x-ray machines and sexual-assault pat downs fit into the equation? Do they make the skyways safer? There is not much argument on either end that they make the flying experience less enjoyable. But are these procedures necessary? I have two thoughts on the matter. The first involves power.
Power, once gained, craves more power. It has an insatiable appetite that once whetted, continues to demand more and more. Petty dictators and criminal overlords are two examples. It could be argued that our present federal government is the perfect example of this postulation. Conversely, powers once surrendered are not easily regained. Power once attained also seeks to protect itself, many times by any means necessary. This describes the current incarnation of the TSA under the leadership of DHS secretary Janet Napolitano. They have been called Nazis and thugs, among other more unprintable descriptions, for their abuse of authority and power, some well documented, some hearsay.
The first analogy I thought of reminded me of a comment a friend of mine made when I was living in Australia. He had just returned from a trip to Indonesia and had this to say about their armed forces. “Give them a gun and a uniform, and they’re rapt.” Meaning to say, the power and authority went straight to their heads. I can see the same kind of mindset in the TSA. Give someone from a badge, a uniform, a radio, and near blanket authority over civilians, and the power goes straight to their heads, inviting arrogance and abuse. When you enter an airport with the scanners you enter a police state where the TSA is the ultimate authority answerable to no one, and you are stripped of your constitutional rights. The TSA says you give up those rights once you buy an airline ticket or you pass through the security gates.
I should mention that not all TSA employees act like omnipotent Nazi stormtroopers. Just as there are good cops who do their jobs with impartiality and justice for all and there are bad cops who take advantage of their power and authority to intimidate and oppress, the same is true of TSA employees. Some are as unhappy with the new security mandates as the travelers and are just as embarrassed to be forced to do the invasive pat-downs as the passengers are outraged at being subjected to them. This is a case of the old adage, blame the boss. If you have ever worked, then you know sometimes your bosses or the company forces you to do things you do not want to do, or are unpleasant to you personally or the people you are supposed to be serving. However in this case, the boss is the biggest boss of all, the federal government under the direct supervision of Barrack Hussein Obama and delegated to his minion, Janet Napolitano.
If there was stronger and better leadership and accountability from above, and I mean from the top of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on down, this would not be such a problem. But with what leadership the DHS is cursed to live under, from the White House on down, it is. The only alternative to change such an attitude of superiority and imperiousness on the part of the TSA, which is ignored if not encouraged from higher up, is through a public backlash, the beginnings of which I think you are seeing now.
The second thought is a question of effectiveness, more strictly, effectiveness versus cost, loss of public goodwill, and inconvenience to the flying traveler. While the nude x-rays and lewd, invasive pat downs might prevent certain banned items from getting onto planes, carrying them bodily is only one way of getting them aboard – and the scanner is not completely effective. Published reports state that the technology employed by the TSA in the backscatter x-rays would not have detected the bomb carried by the terrorist in an attempt on the Saudi prince a few days ago. There is even some question whether either the scan or the pat down would’ve caught the underwear bomber.
The terrorists we are dealing with are not stupid. In fact they are diabolically very smart. It is a never-ending game of cat and mouse between us and them. Once we close one door or block off one entrance, like the rats they are, they keep digging until they find another way in. Now that the door to bring in explosives inside a suicide bomber’s body has been closed, our enemies will do their best to find other ways to bring planes down, thus rendering these procedures not only invasive, controversial, and inconvenient, but also moot. I am not a terrorist genius but after only a minute or two of thought I had already come up with at least one very, very simple way to defeat these security measures. All you have to do is book a multi-stop flight beginning in a very small regional airport that does not have the backscatter x-ray machines. Once you pass through security at the small airport, which is nowhere near as strenuous or secure as its major counterparts, all you need to do is fly to a major hub and deplane. You are already inside the security perimeter without needing to enter through the portal with the x-ray machines and pat down searches. And that is only one small, simple way to defeat them.
If the backscatter x-ray machines and intrusive pat-downs are not acceptable to the flying public, what are alternative methods to making the skies safer? Two possible alternatives to detect explosives are chemical scanners and bomb-sniffing dogs. But I still firmly believe the best defense is credible intelligence and the ability and will to use it. I am talking about profiling, an idea that is anathema to those on the Left who are so blind due to their misguided beliefs. More specifically the strict, no-nonsense Israeli method. Arguably, Israel is the biggest terrorist target in the world, and their airline, El Al, would seem to be one of the premier targets of the terrorists. Yet it is also one of the safest airlines in the world, despite the massive, almost overwhelming threats to its passengers it is forced to endure 24/7. Why? Because they screen and profile. I believe that any country, not just the US, that adopts the Israeli or El Al protocols to secure aircraft and airports, will be light years safer than those that do not. And Israel does not backscatter radiation on their passengers and ogle the nude pictures, or grab them out of line and engage in sexual assault pat-downs.
Why is Israel so safe considering the constant, overbearing threat they are under? One reason is because almost everybody is or has been in the army and almost everybody still carries a gun, but one other major factor is that they profile like crazy. It is an essential measure they must take to secure the very existence of their nation. But our country has been so blindsided and conquered by “political correctness” from the Left through their infiltration of not only politics but education and the media, that even those on the Right are extremely reluctant to even bring up aggressive profiling as a method to make air travel safer, for fear of being branded racist or worse by the Left and the complicit media. Profiling was never a problem before “political correctness” ran amok and castrated and emasculated our country and our culture.
If a cop receives a report that a man in a red shirt has just robbed a 7-11 is the cop going to waste time looking for a woman in a purple dress? Not if he wants to do his job, yet this is precisely the type of behavior the TSA engages in, partly due to its misguided directives from on high. They will force 90-year-old, white grandmothers through the x-ray machines and pat down a three year old girl after taking away her teddy bear, yet they shy away from doing any searches of people of Arab descent because they are afraid of being labeled racist and anti-Muslim. Their fear of offending the occasional Arab traveler evidently surpasses their fear of offending the vast majority of American travelers of European descent. This despite the fact that at least 90% of terrorist acts are perpetrated by Arabs. I do not understand the logic behind random screening of very low risk passengers in order to catch the real terrorist risks when we already know basically who or what they are. It offers very low rewards for much investment and inconvenience. You might get lucky once but it is not very likely. The logic displayed here is not only counterintuitive, it almost defies any and all logic and reason.
After all, it is only common sense. To put it as politically correct as I can, if 90% of terrorist acts are committed by people with green skin, does it make any sense to concentrate your searches on people with blue skin out of fairness or deference to the minority of people with green skin? Only if you are a “politically-correct,” stark-raving-mad, idiot Liberal. Sure, if you begin to profile people who closely fit the description of most terrorists, some innocent people might get hassled unnecessarily but that is a small price to pay to have only a very small part of the flying public mad at you instead of the entire flying public. Plus, it would be more likely to produce the intended result, safer airways. However, the Left and the media they control would never allow this common-sense action in the present-day political environment.
If someone would’ve asked my opinion of the TSA six months ago I would’ve said they made flying much safer. I have never had a problem with the TSA or any airport security, safety, or screening from any country or airport. But that was before the present administration in DC brought out the nude body scanners and intrusive alternative pat-downs to FLL. Now I don’t know what my answer would be. I haven’t flown since the machines were introduced locally. And honestly I don’t know what my choice would be if I had to choose either method of screening. I just don’t feel I should have to make that choice.
There must be a better way, some sort of compromise between safety, convenience, and rights that all can live with. Taking nude x-ray pictures of adult and child travelers and, if they refuse, patting them down like a sexual predator would do, is not the answer.
Jeff Vanderslice
A common, ordinary, everyday traveler named John Tyner recently became an internet sensation after posting on Youtube audio recorded by his cell phone of his interaction with TSA authorities at the San Diego airport after refusing to go through the backscatter machine or be groped by a TSA employee. But he is not alone, as many others have taken up the cause in recent days, including pilots, pilot unions, other airline employees, and advocacy groups from both the Left and the Right.
The TSA defends the invasive probes as a necessary defense against the terrorist threat in this day and age. They claim their safeguards make flying safer for everyone, whether it is an inconvenience or not. Critics say their measures are unnecessary and ineffective, and in fact an unconstitutional invasion of privacy.
The greater question of concern is where does a country, or a society, draw the line between public safety and individual rights? This balancing act is like walking the edge of a knife. Tip too far one way and the people lose their freedoms to an ever-increasingly powerful central government and are destroyed from within. Tip too far the other way and the society opens itself up wide for attack by terrorists and extremists eager to exploit the weaknesses inherent in a free society and is destroyed from without. Statesman Benjamin Franklin succinctly stated it this way: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
Where do the nude x-ray machines and sexual-assault pat downs fit into the equation? Do they make the skyways safer? There is not much argument on either end that they make the flying experience less enjoyable. But are these procedures necessary? I have two thoughts on the matter. The first involves power.
Power, once gained, craves more power. It has an insatiable appetite that once whetted, continues to demand more and more. Petty dictators and criminal overlords are two examples. It could be argued that our present federal government is the perfect example of this postulation. Conversely, powers once surrendered are not easily regained. Power once attained also seeks to protect itself, many times by any means necessary. This describes the current incarnation of the TSA under the leadership of DHS secretary Janet Napolitano. They have been called Nazis and thugs, among other more unprintable descriptions, for their abuse of authority and power, some well documented, some hearsay.
The first analogy I thought of reminded me of a comment a friend of mine made when I was living in Australia. He had just returned from a trip to Indonesia and had this to say about their armed forces. “Give them a gun and a uniform, and they’re rapt.” Meaning to say, the power and authority went straight to their heads. I can see the same kind of mindset in the TSA. Give someone from a badge, a uniform, a radio, and near blanket authority over civilians, and the power goes straight to their heads, inviting arrogance and abuse. When you enter an airport with the scanners you enter a police state where the TSA is the ultimate authority answerable to no one, and you are stripped of your constitutional rights. The TSA says you give up those rights once you buy an airline ticket or you pass through the security gates.
I should mention that not all TSA employees act like omnipotent Nazi stormtroopers. Just as there are good cops who do their jobs with impartiality and justice for all and there are bad cops who take advantage of their power and authority to intimidate and oppress, the same is true of TSA employees. Some are as unhappy with the new security mandates as the travelers and are just as embarrassed to be forced to do the invasive pat-downs as the passengers are outraged at being subjected to them. This is a case of the old adage, blame the boss. If you have ever worked, then you know sometimes your bosses or the company forces you to do things you do not want to do, or are unpleasant to you personally or the people you are supposed to be serving. However in this case, the boss is the biggest boss of all, the federal government under the direct supervision of Barrack Hussein Obama and delegated to his minion, Janet Napolitano.
If there was stronger and better leadership and accountability from above, and I mean from the top of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on down, this would not be such a problem. But with what leadership the DHS is cursed to live under, from the White House on down, it is. The only alternative to change such an attitude of superiority and imperiousness on the part of the TSA, which is ignored if not encouraged from higher up, is through a public backlash, the beginnings of which I think you are seeing now.
The second thought is a question of effectiveness, more strictly, effectiveness versus cost, loss of public goodwill, and inconvenience to the flying traveler. While the nude x-rays and lewd, invasive pat downs might prevent certain banned items from getting onto planes, carrying them bodily is only one way of getting them aboard – and the scanner is not completely effective. Published reports state that the technology employed by the TSA in the backscatter x-rays would not have detected the bomb carried by the terrorist in an attempt on the Saudi prince a few days ago. There is even some question whether either the scan or the pat down would’ve caught the underwear bomber.
The terrorists we are dealing with are not stupid. In fact they are diabolically very smart. It is a never-ending game of cat and mouse between us and them. Once we close one door or block off one entrance, like the rats they are, they keep digging until they find another way in. Now that the door to bring in explosives inside a suicide bomber’s body has been closed, our enemies will do their best to find other ways to bring planes down, thus rendering these procedures not only invasive, controversial, and inconvenient, but also moot. I am not a terrorist genius but after only a minute or two of thought I had already come up with at least one very, very simple way to defeat these security measures. All you have to do is book a multi-stop flight beginning in a very small regional airport that does not have the backscatter x-ray machines. Once you pass through security at the small airport, which is nowhere near as strenuous or secure as its major counterparts, all you need to do is fly to a major hub and deplane. You are already inside the security perimeter without needing to enter through the portal with the x-ray machines and pat down searches. And that is only one small, simple way to defeat them.
If the backscatter x-ray machines and intrusive pat-downs are not acceptable to the flying public, what are alternative methods to making the skies safer? Two possible alternatives to detect explosives are chemical scanners and bomb-sniffing dogs. But I still firmly believe the best defense is credible intelligence and the ability and will to use it. I am talking about profiling, an idea that is anathema to those on the Left who are so blind due to their misguided beliefs. More specifically the strict, no-nonsense Israeli method. Arguably, Israel is the biggest terrorist target in the world, and their airline, El Al, would seem to be one of the premier targets of the terrorists. Yet it is also one of the safest airlines in the world, despite the massive, almost overwhelming threats to its passengers it is forced to endure 24/7. Why? Because they screen and profile. I believe that any country, not just the US, that adopts the Israeli or El Al protocols to secure aircraft and airports, will be light years safer than those that do not. And Israel does not backscatter radiation on their passengers and ogle the nude pictures, or grab them out of line and engage in sexual assault pat-downs.
Why is Israel so safe considering the constant, overbearing threat they are under? One reason is because almost everybody is or has been in the army and almost everybody still carries a gun, but one other major factor is that they profile like crazy. It is an essential measure they must take to secure the very existence of their nation. But our country has been so blindsided and conquered by “political correctness” from the Left through their infiltration of not only politics but education and the media, that even those on the Right are extremely reluctant to even bring up aggressive profiling as a method to make air travel safer, for fear of being branded racist or worse by the Left and the complicit media. Profiling was never a problem before “political correctness” ran amok and castrated and emasculated our country and our culture.
If a cop receives a report that a man in a red shirt has just robbed a 7-11 is the cop going to waste time looking for a woman in a purple dress? Not if he wants to do his job, yet this is precisely the type of behavior the TSA engages in, partly due to its misguided directives from on high. They will force 90-year-old, white grandmothers through the x-ray machines and pat down a three year old girl after taking away her teddy bear, yet they shy away from doing any searches of people of Arab descent because they are afraid of being labeled racist and anti-Muslim. Their fear of offending the occasional Arab traveler evidently surpasses their fear of offending the vast majority of American travelers of European descent. This despite the fact that at least 90% of terrorist acts are perpetrated by Arabs. I do not understand the logic behind random screening of very low risk passengers in order to catch the real terrorist risks when we already know basically who or what they are. It offers very low rewards for much investment and inconvenience. You might get lucky once but it is not very likely. The logic displayed here is not only counterintuitive, it almost defies any and all logic and reason.
After all, it is only common sense. To put it as politically correct as I can, if 90% of terrorist acts are committed by people with green skin, does it make any sense to concentrate your searches on people with blue skin out of fairness or deference to the minority of people with green skin? Only if you are a “politically-correct,” stark-raving-mad, idiot Liberal. Sure, if you begin to profile people who closely fit the description of most terrorists, some innocent people might get hassled unnecessarily but that is a small price to pay to have only a very small part of the flying public mad at you instead of the entire flying public. Plus, it would be more likely to produce the intended result, safer airways. However, the Left and the media they control would never allow this common-sense action in the present-day political environment.
If someone would’ve asked my opinion of the TSA six months ago I would’ve said they made flying much safer. I have never had a problem with the TSA or any airport security, safety, or screening from any country or airport. But that was before the present administration in DC brought out the nude body scanners and intrusive alternative pat-downs to FLL. Now I don’t know what my answer would be. I haven’t flown since the machines were introduced locally. And honestly I don’t know what my choice would be if I had to choose either method of screening. I just don’t feel I should have to make that choice.
There must be a better way, some sort of compromise between safety, convenience, and rights that all can live with. Taking nude x-ray pictures of adult and child travelers and, if they refuse, patting them down like a sexual predator would do, is not the answer.
Jeff Vanderslice