Priding themselves on making no use of judgment whatsoever, the TSA has outdone themselves in
absurd searches and patdowns.
Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger got searched by a Transportation Security Administration employee while going through a security checkpoint at LaGuardia Airport in New York Friday, The Washington Post reports. Kissinger, who was in a wheelchair, was told by a TSA agent that he needed to be searched.
Why now, would Mr. Kissinger need to be searched? Do they really think he possesses the intention, let alone the capability, to take over or destroy the aircraft he would soon be riding in?
Earlier this year, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., was detained at a Nashville airport after refusing to be searched by TSA officials.
Yes, well, of course.
The only thing that would add to the folly would be if the former Secretary of State and author of the Paris Peace Accords was not recognized by our stalwart defenders of freedom.
“They gave him the full pat-down. None of the agents seemed to know who he was.”
Perfect.
Falling to the lowest common denominator. The only good part is that apparently just about EVERYONE gets horrible treatment. No favorites. Everyone is treated as a scumbag. Like the Canadian health system. Certainly not what one hopes for from one's government.
ReplyDeleteApparently there is a small workaround coming for some, though it supposedly costs $100.
ReplyDeletehttp://blog.oregonlive.com/terryrichard/2012/05/security_clearance_at_pdx_gets.html
What I find troubling about the above incident, which is repeated over and over again everyday with lesser known but equally harmless individuals, is that in subjecting Mr. Kissinger to this pat-down search the screeners think they are doing an excellent job, that they have followed protocol and thereby successfully screened the passenger, with nary a thought to whether or not the passenger posed a threat in the first place. NO ONE was made safe by the above pat down. The TSA is pathetic in its indifference to the people and its failure to actually secure safety. All they have secured is inconvenience and cost - a by product that al-Qaeda is without doubt very pleased to see.
ReplyDeleteHit the nail on the head twice. Both scummy and useless.
ReplyDeleteFabulous. Amazing. Wonderful.
ReplyDeleteI love it.
There is no more perfect illustration in existence OR EVEN IMAGINABLE of the antithetical relationship between basic REASON and consensus logic.
There is NO HUMAN BEING ON THE PLANET less deserving of a security search than this limitless hero - and YET that is not the actual point of contention here!
The people who approve of this madness probably agree with me ... and somehow think therefore that they were doing a good thing!
Such is the madness of the age.
Meanwhile, the headless corpses continue to pile.
If I sound despairing even by my standards, it's because my non-pseudonym'd self has been content today -- and suddenly, as always, in a hundred such ways, reality reasserts itself with its usual crass abandon.
Never doubt the value of what you do here, James. As you know, we stand between anything of any value and the jaws of doom.
I remember a column in The Chicago Tribune about the resumption of flights on the Sunday after 9/11. One of their columnists was stuck in Minneapolis after his cross-country flight put down there that day as he did not have a drivers license (and apparently didn't know about buses or trains). It caught my eye because he started the column with his last observations coming first. He had arrived at the airport first thing in the morning as the TV stations were requesting people to do and quickly found out that the first half of the day would consist of airlines inspecting the planes on the ground after the hasty storage, then getting flight crews matched with their planes and routes all around the country. Planes landed that day at the closest airport--away from their home bases and some flight crews had made it home with alternate means. The airlines were just finding out which of the interrupted passenger had stuck around as well and everything was a mess. The columnist admitted that it was then he decided to do his piece on the experiences that day. And admitting he was a liberal, he had originally intended to cover what he thought would be intrusive scrutiny on Middle-Eastern looking passengers--innocents singled out through no fault of their own. Federal and local law enforcement had hastily put together additional airport security teams to check passengers--usually consisting of two men and a female officer--to handle both male and female passengers. The first passengers he saw getting the full treatment was a mother he described as a Scandinavian Blondie traveling with her twin 6-or-7 year-old daughters, both looking like their mom. The next was an eighty-something white woman in a wheelchair who looked confused and scared with the body search and simultaneous questioning. The list went on like that, all unlikely suspects. Lest you think there were none of the Middle Eastern types in the airport that day, he gave a count of them. There were many, including women wearing burkas. He was watching them closely to document their treatment by security, but he didn't see a one given that scrutiny. And he was there until the early evening. Were the security people going out of there way to avoid profiling and checking certain groups? It looked that way and it certainly didn't appear random. Teams let Middle Eastern types pass by and often sprang into action with the unlikely-looking types according to the columnist's reckoning--old people, kids, etc. He put on his Press credentials and tried to talk with the security people and they all told him that they weren't allowed to discuss security search criteria or selection. Even the liberal columnist was forced to conclude that what he witnessed didn't make much sense. Heck, even checking every fourth or fifth person (pick a number) would make more sense.
ReplyDeleteAnd eleven years later, it's still Kabuki theater.
Thanks Terrence, Bedes and Darrell. That's good stuff, one and all.
ReplyDelete