Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Transportation Home  |  Discussions  |  Traffic  |  Columns  |  Q&A     |      Twitter |    Facebook   |  phone Alerts
Posted at 8:53 AM ET, 11/22/2010

TSA discourages scanner boycotts

By Washington Post wire and staff reports

With one of the year's busiest traveling days fast approaching, the Obama administration's top transportation security official on Monday urged passengers angry over safety procedures not to boycott airport body scans.

John Pistole said in nationally broadcast interviews he understands public concerns about privacy in the wake of the Transportation Security Administration's tough new airline boarding security checks.

But at the same time, he said a relatively small proportion of the 34 million people who have flown since the new procedures went into effect have had the body pat-downs that have come under withering criticism in recent days.

With the Thanksgiving travel rush less than 48 hours away, Pistole implored passengers Monday not to take delaying actions or engage in boycotts of body scans, actions he said would only serve to "tie up people who want to go home and see their loved ones."

About 1.6 million people are expected to fly for the Thanksgiving holiday. According to the TSA, the body scans take about five seconds, with an extra 10 to 15 seconds for processing. Pat-downs take 1 to 2 minutes.

An Ashburn man, Brian J. Sodergre, is organizing a national "opt out" day to encourage passengers to say no to using the new body scanners. He wants people to insist on public pat-downs if they are traveling on the day before Thanksgiving, which is one of the busiest travel days of the year.

According to a Web site for the day, "the goal of National Opt Out Day is to send a message to our lawmakers that we demand change. We have a right to privacy and buying a plane ticket should not mean that we're guilty until proven innocent."

"Just one or two recalcitrant passengers at an airport is all it takes to cause huge delays," said Paul Ruden, a spokesman for the American Society of Travel Agents, which has warned its more than 8,000 members about delays resulting from the body-scanner boycott. "It doesn't take much to mess things up anyway -- especially if someone purposely tries to mess it up."

Graphic: How the scanners work

Related stories:

Government scientists offer alternative to scanner images

Dealing with Thanksgiving airport security

Instead of a TSA airport search he'll take the train

TSA officials get 'pat-downs'

Will you undergo a pat-down?

Full-body scanners installed at Dulles

By Washington Post wire and staff reports  | November 22, 2010; 8:53 AM ET
Categories:  Airports, Aviation  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The week ahead for traffic, transit
Next: TSA responds to child pat-down video

Comments

Pissy and Nappy can shove it.

Posted by: seraphina21 | November 22, 2010 9:07 AM | Report abuse

So it looks like "We'll assault you if you don't get nudie scanned." isn't working as a deterrent. Their next approach appears to be "You will mess up everyone's day if you don't get nudie scanned."

Posted by: yatesc1 | November 22, 2010 9:09 AM | Report abuse

The person behind the scans is asking people to not boycott it. Shocking.

Posted by: CNUCatherine | November 22, 2010 9:16 AM | Report abuse

The person behind the scans is asking people to not boycott it. Shocking.

Posted by: CNUCatherine | November 22, 2010 9:17 AM | Report abuse

No wonder Congress is not concerned. They are exempted from any form of search! Congress has still not gotten it.
The so called 'puffer' scan was a billion dollar dud that was found to be both unreliable and a contractor scam along the lines of finding water with a stick. The puffer device contracts were awarded to friends of the last president and amazing enough stopped as soon he left office.
But then Obama awarded a non-compete electronic records contract to a former college buddy and Nancy Reagan did the same for the military clubs credit card so nothing changes except the public gets ripped off.

Posted by: KBlit | November 22, 2010 9:28 AM | Report abuse

"You will inconvenience other people." I imagine the blacks who protested segregation and the like in the 1950s and 1960s were ridiculed for being "disruptive" as well.

Posted by: 1995hoo | November 22, 2010 9:33 AM | Report abuse

I'm not surprised that the TSA doesn't want people to challenge their authority, but that's all the more reason why people *should* do it!

The citizenry, in this situation, has almost no power. The TSA changes its rules at will, without any satisfactory explanation, and subjects *American citizens* to searches by government agents that in any other circumstances would require warrants/probable cause or would be grounds for a sexual assault charge.

Meanwhile, the people have no legitimate recourse to protest the government's actions -- try complaining at the airport and see how far that will get you. So far neither Congress nor the Administration seem inclined to respect the voice of the people when we say "enough!"

The only power we have left is to disrupt the system. It's nobody's first choice, but it's become the angry citizen's last resort against a government that has overstepped its bounds to an unacceptable degree.

Posted by: mccxxiii | November 22, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Look at your next airline ticket and you will find a “Security Fee”. What is the Security Fee that was passed after September 11, 2001? It is an ISLAM TAX. It is more money out of an American’s pocket to pay for the privilege of living with Muslims amongst us.

It turns out that we pay an enormous amount of money for our life with Islam. Let’s look at a list of expenses that we bear because of Islamic ideology. I f there were no Islam we would not have the Transportation Security Administration, Homeland Security, the Iraq war, the Afghanistan war, all that so-called terrorist work by the FBI, rebuilding the World Trade Center and who knows what else.

The Iraq war has cost about $700 billion, the Afghan war has cost about $250 billion and all of the government agencies cost in the neighborhood of tens of billions per year. We are up to at least a TRILLION dollars of our ISLAM TAX. That little $10 Security Fee may seem small, but that is for every round trip ticket sold in the US.

Another part of the ISALM TAX is the jizyah (the dhimmi tax) that we call foreign aide. We pay various Islamic governments, including Egypt, Pakistan, the so-called Palestinians and others. Why do we pay the jizyah? We want to be friends (Never mind the 12 verses in the Koran that say that Muslims are never the friends of kafirs, unbelievers). We are bringing Muslim refugees into America where they receive more benefits than American citizens, another ISLAM TAX.

Why did Islam attack the World Trade Towers? Because they were the World TRADE Towers, an economic target. What was the purpose? To destroy the economy of America.

The ISLAM TAX is a trillion dollars and counting. If we did not have this tax, it would certainly ease the economic crunch we have today.

ALL ISLAM has to do is to keep up the attack. It does not matter whether they win or lose a particular battle. The more Islam practices jihad, the more we deny it and create some governmental nightmare that avoids the ideological war with Islam
less

Posted by: zakgold | November 22, 2010 9:37 AM | Report abuse

It's like the government kind of wants us to revolt. What next?

Posted by: hebe1 | November 22, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

It takes only 1 or 2 protesters to cause an enormous delay? "It doesn't take much to mess things up anyway"? I think that is an issue in and of itself.

Posted by: bobrobertson | November 22, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

I think they are purposefully trying to make the pat downs as unpleasant as possible to force people into full body nude xray machines they don't want to go into -- to sell machines, not to keep us safe. More people will probably die of cancer or even anxiety caused by these machines than will be saved from underwear bombs.

Posted by: SarahBB | November 22, 2010 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Why do Americans despise Pistole packing Napolitano? Why do they want to hiss at Big Sis? Why does she regard the constitution as tissue paper to discard when she wants to?

This anti-constitutional power grab is an unpopular as Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre, when Nixon dismissed independent special prosecutor Archibald Cox during Watergate, followed by the resignations of Attorney General Elliot Richardson and Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus on October 20, 1973.

Posted by: alance | November 22, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

The terrorists have won.

Thank you, Obama, for making me miss President Bush.

Posted by: getjiggly1 | November 22, 2010 9:55 AM | Report abuse

GET OVER IT

Posted by: tttt1 | November 22, 2010 9:58 AM | Report abuse

How is it that we Americans think we can slaughter civilians, soldiers and about anyone else in their own homelands and not suffer retaliation in our homeland. Justification for our continuing adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan are doubtful at best. With Israel, we are enabling slaughter for territorial conquest, ethnic cleansing, racial, religious and territorial conquest in violation of UN Resolutions. Yes, people out there want to kill us and will go about it however they can. Do you blame them?

Posted by: smehgol | November 22, 2010 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Someone please ask Mr. Pistole how many terrorists he has caught so far by inspecting their private parts. I doubt any, else he would have trumpeted that news to the skies yesterday.

Posted by: jibe | November 22, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Squashing roaches

cures most romantic love triangles and first love relationships

Full body scans may be done to blind and disabled veterans only without permission

Posted by: kadija1 | November 22, 2010 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Pistole, the purpose of the boycotts (and there will be more) is to put you out of a job. You might as well shut up and goose step back to your office.

Posted by: darkglobe5 | November 22, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Pistole, the purpose of the boycotts (and there will be more) is to put you out of a job. You might as well shut up and goose step back to your office.

Posted by: darkglobe5 | November 22, 2010 11:00 AM | Report abuse

My life and the safety of people I hold dear is very important to me. I see no reason why anyone's security should be compromised because of bodily shame.
Whether it's a personal battle of self acceptance, or a problem with what we've been taught socially, I think we should see the benefit rather than embarrassment. I can't help but believe this is more a matter of self esteem than privacy.
Considering how unfit (physically) the population of this country is, I think our sympathies would be better directed toward the person who has to view the scans.

Posted by: traveler20 | November 22, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

First no terrorist attempting to harm the plans have gone through the body scans, so none have been caught, it appears there are very, very few terrorists attempting to bring down planes by boarding them. Note the TSA has found explosive devices that were disassembled, but there was no attempt to bring down a plane.

Second it should be interesting if this boycott goes off in a big way, since it is an organized attempt to bring a major segment of the US transportation system. The process is using fear of massive delays to force political change, this very easily fits the definition of terrorism under the post 9/11 laws. So be careful, its always possible the TSA will play hardball and arrest at least the leaders for terrorism. Note they shouldn't because as I said before there are not nearly enough attempted terrorist attacks to justify this level of intrusion.

Posted by: Muddy_Buddy_2000 | November 22, 2010 11:24 AM | Report abuse

When Abdulmutallab checked in for his flight from Nigeria to Detroit via Amsterdam on Christmas Eve, he showed a ticket paid for with cash ($2,831) and checked no bags. Seem suspicious? No one raised any questions. In Amsterdam, the airport has begun installing full-body image scanners that might have detected the explosives sewn into Abdulmutallab's underwear. But Dutch authorities told NEWSWEEK that the American government did not want U.S.-bound passengers to pass through the intrusive scanners, apparently for privacy reasons.
...
One passenger seated in the same row, but on the far side of the plane, jumped up and scrambled across the seats to wrestle with the man. He shook the half-melted syringe from Abdulmutallab's hand and started ripping off his pants, looking for more explosives. Flight attendants appeared and sprayed both men with fire extinguishers.
...
A senior administration official said that Obama was "extremely angry" when he learned how much information intelligence agencies had collected about Abdulmutallab before the bombing

The Abdulmutallab case is a clear example of the risk of allowing people to bypass full-body scanners, or the pat-down alternative.

Richard Reid and Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab were both stopped by fellow passengers while in the process of trying to set off explosives.

Do we really want to relax our screening procedures so we must rely on passengers to stop suicide bombers?

Passengers stopped Reid and Abdulmutallab, but 9/11 was a different story. On only one of those four aircraft did the passengers thwart terrorists intent on committing suicide - and none survived.

Is your junk really THAT special?

Posted by: asmith1 | November 22, 2010 11:46 AM | Report abuse

You whiners are hillarious! Like anybody gives a crap what your junk looks like. Your indignation is as transparent as your clothes in a scanner. Don't like it, take a bus.

Posted by: dem4life1 | November 22, 2010 12:11 PM | Report abuse

"You will inconvenience other people." I imagine the blacks who protested segregation and the like in the 1950s and 1960s were ridiculed for being "disruptive" as well.

Posted by: 1995hoo | November 22, 2010 9:33 AM

****

Thank you!

Posted by: DOEJN | November 22, 2010 12:16 PM | Report abuse

The faux security scans will not win the war on terrorism

Posted by: HillRat | November 22, 2010 12:23 PM | Report abuse

" I see no reason why anyone's security should be compromised because of bodily shame. "

Absolutely! In fact, since these machines aren't perfect, I propose we simply strip down every passenger traveling, stick a bag over there head to avoid being identified, and herd them into cargo holds like cattle. This would serve to better make sure they carry nothing, and are unable to harm anyone in flight.

I mean as long as we're going safety first, then lets really attack the problem, right?

Posted by: spynnal | November 22, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

"You will inconvenience other people." I imagine the blacks who protested segregation and the like in the 1950s and 1960s were ridiculed for being "disruptive" as well.

Posted by: 1995hoo | November 22, 2010 9:33 AM
-----------------------
No, they were more than ridiculed, they were hosed, beaten, thrown into jail or murdered. Please don't equate the stupidity of not wanting to be scanned or body searched for security purposes with the protest of black Americans of the 1950's and 1960's. Your show your ignorance.

Posted by: OHREALLYNOW | November 22, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

The faux security scans will not win the war on terrorism

Posted by: HillRat | November 22, 2010 12:23 PM
=========

Perhaps not, but they might prevent your body parts from being scattered over a half-mile crash site, because one of the passengers missed the suicide bomber sitting next to him/her.

But in the end, that's OK - none of the deceased passengers were offended or forced to reveal unidentifiable body parts on a remote viewing moniter.

In the end, this is what a handful of potential air passengers are demanding - giving a new definition to dying with dignity.

Posted by: asmith1 | November 22, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Considering how unfit (physically) the population of this country is, I think our sympathies would be better directed toward the person who has to view the scans.
-----------------------
Thank you "traveler20", I think we ALL need a good laugh!

Posted by: OHREALLYNOW | November 22, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

"Pistole implored passengers Monday not to take delaying actions or engage in boycotts of body scans, actions he said would only serve to "tie up people who want to go home and see their loved ones."
________

Demonstrating once again that the TSA bureaucracy doesn't get it at all.

Suppose someone puts a gun to your friend's head and says, "Cooperate or your friend gets it!" If your friend ends up getting shot because you didn't give in to this guy's demands, is it really your fault?

The TSA created this outrageous situation. If chaos is the result, it is TSA's fault. Period.

Posted by: anon99 | November 22, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

"You will inconvenience other people." I imagine the blacks who protested segregation and the like in the 1950s and 1960s were ridiculed for being "disruptive" as well.

Posted by: 1995hoo | November 22, 2010 9:33 AM
-----------------------
No, they were more than ridiculed, they were hosed, beaten, thrown into jail or murdered. Please don't equate the stupidity of not wanting to be scanned or body searched for security purposes with the protest of black Americans of the 1950's and 1960's. Your show your ignorance.

Posted by: OHREALLYNOW | November 22, 2010 12:29 PM

****

I think 1995hoo's point was not that the consequences were exactly the same--just that standing up for one's rights sometimes requires being disruptive.

Posted by: DOEJN | November 22, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Scans and pat downs aren't enough!

The TSA needs to look up our butts if they are really serious. Let me on Fox & Friends and I'll volunteer to have TSA look up my butt to show True Americans it's a small price to pay to protect us from the heathen Muslims.

Of course, we'll need to have Halliburton install butt washers just prior to these security checks.

Posted by: areyousaying | November 22, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

"Absolutely! In fact, since these machines aren't perfect, I propose we simply strip down every passenger traveling, stick a bag over there head to avoid being identified, and herd them into cargo holds like cattle. This would serve to better make sure they carry nothing, and are unable to harm anyone in flight.

I mean as long as we're going safety first, then lets really attack the problem, right?

Posted by: spynna"

No system will ever be perfect, and I think our concerns should not only include terrorism. Children are going to schools with weapons and taking out their frustrations on classmates. Some are committing suicide. There is no telling what an individual may do in a desperate situation. Everyone experiences the roller coaster of life, some people can't handle it, a few decide to take other people down with them. That decision could include being on a plane, and children. Horribly sad, but true.

Flying is a nervous experience for many people. I personally feel a little better knowing that security is trying to make sure I get to my destination in one piece. It's not like the scans are being broadcast on wide screen monitors throughout the airport for all other passengers to view. And I would much prefer someone scan my child than physically pat them down.

Posted by: traveler20 | November 22, 2010 1:38 PM | Report abuse

By discourages, they probably mean that they'll just arrest these people. They've started arresting people for filming TSA absuses.

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local-beat/Passenger-Chooses-Strip-Down-Over-Pat-Down-109872589.html?dr

Posted by: scoran | November 22, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

I opt out of the scanner (not due to the naked pictures -- I'd bring full nudes of myself to the airport if I thought it would get me through faster) but rather due to the fact that the allegedly safe dose of radiation for a full body scan is not actually directed at the full body. Instead it's focused only at the skin and thus delivers a higher than advertised dose of radiation to your skin, eyes and reproductive organs -- or "junk" as the San Diego passenger put it.

Since I've never heard of anyone getting cancer from an over-clothes grope, I think I'll stick with that.

Posted by: Left_of_the_Pyle | November 22, 2010 2:34 PM | Report abuse

I LIKE to get it from any1 I can get it from & anytime!
Wife, gf, bf, ga yz, straights, tsa.

Go islam.
Go christians.
Happy Kwanza.

Posted by: Rocc00 | November 22, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

ps - but the mot important thing is that I rather not die from cancer.

Posted by: Rocc00 | November 22, 2010 2:47 PM | Report abuse

How would you like being a TSA "pat down" expert and have to deal with the likes of Nancy Pelosi and her Castro St. gang in San Francisco?

Posted by: nmg3rln | November 22, 2010 2:49 PM | Report abuse

"The faux security scans will not win the war on terrorism

Posted by: HillRat | November 22, 2010 12:23 PM
=========

Perhaps not, but they might prevent your body parts from being scattered over a half-mile crash site, because one of the passengers missed the suicide bomber sitting next to him/her.

But in the end, that's OK - none of the deceased passengers were offended or forced to reveal unidentifiable body parts on a remote viewing moniter.

In the end, this is what a handful of potential air passengers are demanding - giving a new definition to dying with dignity.

Posted by: asmith1 | November 22, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse"

The problem, dear asmith1, is that there is no evidence that these scanners/pat downs have prevented ANYTHING. Even the TSA admits these procedures wouldn't have detected the underwear bomber. In other words, chances of preventing an attack: unknown. Chances of being humiliated/rights taken away: 100%.

Posted by: linguist64 | November 22, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Ideal scenario: Airports across the country grind to a near halt due to 20-30 passengers at each refusing to submit to dangerous radiation or sexual assault as a condition of air travel. Some TSA workers become more testy and get extra aggressive with their "searches." They are subsequently torn apart, literally, by enraged mobs at the airport.

It will take a scenario like this to put an end to this assault on the Constitution. Let's hope it happens.

Posted by: bigbrother1 | November 22, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

The article admits that a relatively small number of protesters can bring the system down.

If travelers are inconvenienced, they sure won't blame the protesters. They'll direct their anger exactly where it belongs, at the TSA. That's why they are hoping you don't opt out.

People should get out there and shut down this unconstitutional and idiotic mess. And it appears that it will be very easy, as well as perfectly lawful to accomplish. And besides, it's the patriotic thing to do!

Posted by: info53 | November 22, 2010 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Passive defenses won't stop terrorism. Any one who really wants to do so while find a way around them.

We just need to accept that this world is a dangerous place filled with criminals and would-be tyrants and that the price of liberty will sometimes be our safety or even our lives. We should do what we can to minimize the risks, obviously, but we shouldn't take it to the point of living in fear. Somehow, spending millions upon millions on these machines seems to be the opposite of that.

The fact is that we can put these in every single airport we have and if someone really wants to blow up an airplane, they will find a way to do it.

Posted by: andrew23boyle | November 22, 2010 3:28 PM | Report abuse


This misguided moron caused the problem by implementing a ridiculous and probably illegal MASS body search of innocent people;

Now he want citizens to simply OBEY and give up their Civil Rights.

He should be FIRED!

Posted by: chicago77 | November 22, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

This is an utter waste of time.

Everyone with actual counter-terrorism experience knows it.

Just stop the wasteful and ineffective body scans and body searches.

WHICH PART OF NO! don't you GET?

Posted by: WillSeattle | November 22, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

The best way to solve the problem is to boycott. The TSA has 60 some thousand employees, who get excited about searches and as of yet haven't caught one single terriost. I for one will not fly anywhere and since my son works for a major airline I fly a whole lot cheaper then most of the public, but I won't go through the security system. I will not subject myself or my wife to these acts of terrioism by non other than our own Government.

Posted by: viejo70 | November 22, 2010 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Anyone out here is willing to start a petition for firing this Pistole guy for sheer incompetence and arrogance? Between Chertoff, Napolitano and Pistole you still cannot assemble half a brain! Besides, the DHS-TSA are the brainchildren of two confirmed morons: the Idiot in Chief and Senator Lieberman.

Posted by: fgominho | November 22, 2010 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Anyone out here is willing to start a petition for firing this Pistole guy for sheer incompetence and arrogance? Between Chertoff, Napolitano and Pistole you still cannot assemble half a brain! Besides, the DHS-TSA are the brainchildren of two confirmed morons: the Idiot in Chief and Senator Lieberman.

Posted by: fgominho | November 22, 2010 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Anyone out here is willing to start a petition for firing this Pistole guy for sheer incompetence and arrogance? Between Chertoff, Napolitano and Pistole you still cannot assemble half a brain! Besides, the DHS-TSA are the brainchildren of two confirmed morons: the Idiot in Chief and Senator Lieberman.

Posted by: fgominho | November 22, 2010 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Anyone out here is willing to start a petition for firing this Pistole guy for sheer incompetence and arrogance? Between Chertoff, Napolitano and Pistole you still cannot assemble half a brain! Besides, the DHS-TSA are the brainchildren of two confirmed morons: the Idiot in Chief and Senator Lieberman.

Posted by: fgominho | November 22, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

The anti-Obama whiners would do well to remember that it was their hero that caused this mess, and their party that perpetuates it, NOT Obama or his administration.

It was Bush that ramped up the security to further Rove's agenda of unending war and perpetual fear. Now that it's in place, Obama can't slow it down because the GOP would go at him like rabid dogs.

It's worth remembering that once you start something like this, it's really hard to stop it.

Posted by: info53 | November 22, 2010 5:12 PM | Report abuse

test

Posted by: info53 | November 22, 2010 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Pistole, hinting at public retribution is typically not an effective method of bringing public opinion over to your side.

Perhaps you will consider that, when Mr. Obama replaces your arrogant self with someone less politically embarrassing.

Posted by: thomasmc1957 | November 22, 2010 7:59 PM | Report abuse

"The problem, dear asmith1, is that there is no evidence that these scanners/pat downs have prevented ANYTHING. Even the TSA admits these procedures wouldn't have detected the underwear bomber. In other words, chances of preventing an attack: unknown. Chances of being humiliated/rights taken away: 100%.

Posted by: linguist64"
--------------------------------

This procedure is obviously creating a stir and making people very uncomfortable. I see that as a powerful deterrent. Perhaps the lack of evidence is a sign that it works.

As far as humiliation goes, I find that is a personal problem. One that is fostered by uptight conservative views and / or poor self image. Frankly, my body arriving intact is of more importance than worrying about how the poor soul in the booth feels about how it looks. Do you think your Dr. hangs out in the lunch room discussing your private parts with the staff over a microwave lunch? You are just another ticket unless you are carrying something you shouldn't.

You have the right to choose not to fly if you are uncomfortable with the procedures. Purchasing a ticket is equivalent to agreeing to the "terms of service". Just the same as creating an account to post on this site. You have the right to know that the airport is doing everything in it's power to ensure that someone else on your flight is not packing something that could be fatal to everyone.

It's a thankless job but someone has to do it.

Posted by: traveler20 | November 22, 2010 8:15 PM | Report abuse

"You have the right to choose not to fly if you are uncomfortable with the procedures."

Don't people even READ the Constitution?

You have a RIGHT to be immune to illegal search and seizure. You have a RIGHT to travel freely without being impeded by the government. You have a RIGHT to having the government work for you, not to cower and be stampeded like a sheep.

These "common sense" types who don't have a clue they live in America, or the slightest idea what freedom and rights even MEAN, set my teeth on edge. They are so matter-of-fact about dropping their rights and grabbing their ankles, and even preach to the rest of us that we should, too.

Posted by: info53 | November 22, 2010 10:01 PM | Report abuse

Solution; two lines one for those who will use the scanner and one for pat down.
Scanner users are guaranteed their flight will not depart without them the pat down line will not be guaranteed. Other solution set up seperate flights for those who do not want to be screened and see who will pilot or crew them bring your box cutters and have a free for all. We always fear the wrong things in this country be more afraid of the corporate citizen who has equal or greater right than the individual go to the executive terminal at the airport and see what I mean.

Posted by: J1107 | November 23, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company