Air Travel Security: Fact or Fiction (Deja vu All Over Again!)

WARNING LABEL : The article that follows is rated M for mature themes. No animals were harmed in the making of this article, although much of the humor focused on donkey-like doings...

Almost a year ago, just after the unsuccessful attempt of the so-called "underwear bomber," I wrote an article about "air travel security."

In that article, I warned about what might be coming as we moved toward an impossible-to-implement, fully safe aviation system. Unfortunately, I didn't go far enough in my predictions. Events in the past three weeks, as the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) implemented even more intrusive body searches, suggest that the downhill slide into full body searches (inside and out), and loss of all traveling freedoms, is accelerating.

And, as I pen this story, my wife dutifully noted that any chance I may have ever had of running for political office is now off the table! Good!

First signs

I first saw the signs when I refused to use the full body scanner at Baltimore's BWI Airport a few months ago. Instead of simply wanding me, the TSA agent yelled out, "We have a refuser here, a refuser. Need an agent to...." I believe the TSA agent used the word "refuser" four times.

The intent was clearly to intimidate me into accepting the full body scanner.

My wife, on the other hand, with some metal screws in her knee due to a recent surgery, endured both the scanner and a follow-up wanding.

That was her second such experience. An earlier one, in El Paso, TX in July, demonstrated TSA's growing incompetence. After her full body scan, the TSA agent requested a pat down for her right leg. Alas, the screws are in her left one!

Then in late October, I again refused a full body scanner. This time, it was at the Kansas City, MO airport. Here, the TSA agent simply noted that he, "had an opt out and needed someone to do a pat down." I told the agent what happened in Baltimore and he replied that, "we aren't supposed to do that. We are supposed to simply state 'opt out.'"

Following that, I was subjected to a full and quite intrusive pat down. And boy, was I surprised when the agent got as friendly as he did!

In fairness, my TSA screener at least, gave me a full description of what he was going to do and he offered me a chance to go into a screened, non-public, area. And, from what I could tell, he wasn't thrilled with what he had to do.

Still, it was pretty close to molestation, and I'm a male. I can only imagine what a woman feels as she gets groped and prodded. Wouldn't that get someone on the street or on a date arrested?

Well, the incoming district attorney (DA) for San Mateo, CA thinks so. According to a Fox News article, the DA, "... vowed to prosecute any complaints of inappropriate touching by airport security screeners."

Since Janet Napolitano, the head of Homeland Security, TSA's parent agency, believes that all of this is necessary to protect us, at all costs, I have to resurrect images of Nazi Germany in the 1930's. Didn't Hitler tell the populace that all the rules he put into place were needed to protect the homeland?

Back then, people responded like sheep. Fortunately, here in the good old USA, folks are talking up. Thank goodness.

Ben Franklin got it right when he noted that, "Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security."

Isn't that we are talking about here?

I value my Fourth Amendment rights too much to just blindly give them up for a false sense of security. And I resent being told that I am suspected of being guilty of something without due cause. Police can't stop and search a car without justification, but TSA can stop us and search our bodies without one.

Is civil disobedience a good thing?

So, my wife and I have arrived at a few ideas about what's yet to come and what we might want to try to do to take a stand (obviously without getting arrested).

First, we will not refuse security. The overall concept of not having a bomber on an airplane is good thing.

But, I will continue to refuse the full body scan. Then, as I am groped and fondled, I will, in best theatrical practice, act out a fake male sexual culmination. After all, if it's good enough for Meg Ryan (When Harry Met Sally), it should be good enough for me. Alternatively, I can thank the TSA agent for the experience, perhaps indicating that it was better than I get at home (LOL).

I've asked my wife to join me in this so we can have a simultaneous fake "experience." So far, she's refused. But, TSA rules apparently allow a traveling companion to be with you when you are patted down. Hence there is some hope for this opportunity.

Since the TSA agents are getting so personal, maybe they can simply provide the rest of the annual physical while they are screening us. They could ask the guys to look to the right and cough and for both men and women to allow completion of those much anticipated cavity searches.

Just think, we could manufacture new tee shirts that read, "Support your TSA screeners; they are the next generation of doctors under Obamacare."

We also opted to purchase travel pasties just to shield ourselves from radiation should we be required to undertake the full body x-ray screenings.

Of course, maybe we just shouldn't wear underwear!

Exemptions and other issues

I am especially concerned, however, that there is even any consideration of exempting Muslim women from these intrusive body searches, whether via at electronic or human hands. And allowing them to self-check their head pieces borders on idiocy. Aren't these women part of the culture that we are trying keep from blowing up our planes?

My wife's approach is that all American's should dress as Muslims and then request exemptions.

And, given limited resources, why do we keep spending on efforts to cast a net over ALL travelers instead of looking specifically for those who fit appropriate profiles. Yes, I've used that awful word - profile.

But, let's be realistic. If a middle-aged white male were known to have robbed a grocery store, it would make sense to search for a middle-aged white male. How often will police look instead for an 85-year old black grandmother? Or a 16-year old Asian female?

Now the pilots have been given a pass (because they already have the capability of destroying a plane without explosive). Why then must that exemption wait until January to be implemented? What do we, as a Nation, gain by continuing to check pilots for the next 45 days?

I haven't even gone into homosexual territory yet. But, if males screen males to avoid any male-female sexual impropriety, what happens if a homosexual TSA agent screens a homosexual of the same sex. Does that open the door to potential legal sexual issues? Or perhaps, TSA needs a "don't ask, don't tell policy."

Secure Flight Program

To add insult to injury, we now have to deal with the Secure Flight Program. This is TSA's answer to detecting travelers who may be using illegitimate aliases or have names on a terror watch list. Heaven help those of us who don't use our first names, but use an initial instead!

I am one of these. I use my first initial and middle name on all of my daily actions. I have been doing this since 8th grade, 52 years ago. H. Michael is my handle.

Unfortunately, my government issued documents - driver's license, passport, Social Security card - all use my full name, Harvey Michael (oh, no. I finally divulged what the H. stands for!).

But a week ago, TSA almost didn't let me board a plane because of the name mismatch. Even though I had completed the Secure Flight information online, and at the check-in kiosk, the TSA agent never bothered to look this up. Oh, right, where is their computer located at the check-in area?

Then on the return flight, Delta flagged the name mismatch and told me that TSA wouldn't let me through security. The TSA agent who checked my traveling credentials didn't even flinch.

After the first incident, I was concerned that I would have to either legally change my name or totally redo my adult life and start using a name I hadn't used for more than half a century.

So, I checked online and the TSA guidelines are clear. As long as I complete the Secure Flight online form and the names are "close," I'm good to go.

I have now printed out that web page information and the Name Secure page and I plan to carry both with me for all air travel.

Moving Forward...

In conclusion, I want to make something perfectly clear. I am pro safe flying. But I am against doing stuff that makes no sense. Right now, the process and the enforcement of rules leaves a lot to be desired.

And, to think, all of this gets implemented, even with a lengthy notification period, just before two key holiday travel periods. It would appear that the effort is designed to get us to follow the rules, like sheep, for ease of convenience.

I'm thrilled that the traveling public, pilots and others are all voicing concerns about what's afoot. I can only hope that the bureaucrats in Washington, who are themselves exempt from many of these intrusive acts, get the message.

Meanwhile, TSA deserves all of the verbal abuse that it is receiving. May they continue to be the butt of many tongue-in-cheek jokes (pun intended). And may they finally wake up and institute meaningful security measures that protect our safety and protect our rights.