The TSA Molestation Files: Dana Loesch

The TSA has groped again.

Conservative radio host and Breitbart Editor, Dana Loesch, was treated to an ‘enhanced screening’ where the TSA agents repeatedly pressed down on her — around her vagina. No, this isn’t a joke and with all the things going on in this country at the moment  and an election on our doorstep, the TSA with its mind-boggling breaches of our liberties had taken a backseat. Not anymore.

I have kept my readers informed of TSA activities via this blog and my Morning Links.  Those stories were horrifying, yet even I admit to compartmentalizing them. These events had happened to people I did not know and so I set them aside after being angry for a bit about it.

Hearing the escalating stories Dana has posted about her encounters with the TSA made me pretty angry; this last event really made me angry. I’ve had the honor of meeting Dana Loesch and her husband, Chris. They are two of the coolest people ever and handled my ‘Boo Radley’ moment meeting them better than I did. The two of them are good people, folks just like you and me. What happened to Dana with the TSA this time, and in the past, should not have happened to her… or to any of us.

Loesch took to Twitter and relayed this latest TSA attack in pretty frank detail for the 140 character limit and yes, I consider these ‘pat downs’ to be attacks. Here is just one of her tweets:

TSA said I was covered in explosives, took me to a private room and touched my vagina. So how was your day?

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch)

I often wondered when I traveled with my child, when they were barely 4 years old, what I would do if one of the agents pulled us out of line and required a screening like this for me… or worse, for my kid. It’s the kind of nightmare that makes it just fine and dandy to me to drive over 10 hours to a destination rather than flying in 2 hours.

Dana got some video of the this latest violation, up until a TSA agent closed the door:

Video Detail:

On the afternoon of October 14th, 2012, TSA agents in terminal four at the Phoenix Airport forced me into a private room where their “enhanced screening” included pressing down repeatedly upon the front of my vaginal area.

It began after I was “randomly selected” for an additional screening which consisted of swabbing my hands with paper strips. The strips were then taken to a machine for analysis and an alarm sounded. TSA agents determined that I had a suspicious, possibly explosive, residue on my hands and required another, “enhanced screening.”

Read here why these tests are unreliable:…

I was, of course, aggravated, as we arrived two hours early and already 15 minutes had gone by due to the amount of time I had to wait on agents and the swab. During this time an elderly gentleman behind me and in front of my husband was forced to stand (despite having to use a cane and being unable to do so well alone) and not permitted to lean on anything or given a wheelchair, despite my husband requesting one.

The agents finally gathered my belongings and led me away from the populated security lines to a more secluded area near the private rooms. I asked twice for a public screening and was denied.

They performed the regular pat-down and then the agent informed me that she would be using the front of her hands to “sweep” my groin. She pressed and swept across my crotch three times horizontally and three times vertically. In any other circumstance this would be sexual assault.

The agents themselves were friendly and smiled, yet I was still denied a public screening and no witness of my own present for the screening itself (a second agent was in the room at the time). I had no reason to be angry with the agents themselves, yet I was angry, and still am, at the regulations which require them to routinely violate men, women, and children in the name of a false sense of security.

Read about my similar experience with Providence, RI’s TSA here:

After concluding that I wasn’t a terrorist hiding weapons in my vagina, the TSA agents allowed me to go. They also gave me information about pre-check, which they said would help me avoid such procedures.

Unfortunately, pre-check isn’t available in all airports and innocent Americans shouldn’t be subjected to a full FBI check simply to board a plane. Also, I doubt we would pass the test considering Janet Napolitano put conservatives like me (and many others) on the DHS domestic terror watch list back in April 2009:…

They also did it to our vets:…

The above is video of what happened this afternoon, filmed by my husband. He filmed it vertically so as to avoid detection. They forced me to stop filming, against their own rules (I wasn’t impeding the procedure and was not near monitors) last time.

Vote liberty.

We have a lot to get done as we roll up on November 6th. When you hit the voting booth, remember this article and remind yourself that the TSA might just be getting warmed up.

Related Reading:

Weekend Caption Contest™ Winners
CNN Joins Attack-The-Rich Bandwagon
  • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

    Is strong the entitlement force with Loesch. Special she is.

    I wonder how many times she said “Do you know who I am?!!” to the harried TSA workers.

    Loesch is a drama queen on an endless quest for publicity. The media witch who is always indignant about something (LOOK AT ME!!) is an unfortunate symptom of decadence.

    For all people complain about the TSA, are there any other countries who make it easier? Most places have two searches, some even three, plus a bunch of personal questions. TSA is quick and easy in comparison. I guess you have to travel a little and gain perspective to experience that.

    I fly a lot, and always thank the TSA people, because I know they are hassled by a-holes such as Loesch. There are no perfect security systems.

    • I can always count on Chico to miss the point entirely and/or take up a contrarian position.

      You fly a lot, eh? Ever had an enhanced pat down? If yes – Was it just a ‘hassle’ to have a perfect stranger wrangle around in your personal spaces? Were you being a drama king/queen because you felt violated?


      “There are no perfect security systems.”
      Yep. I agree. And the TSA is one of them.

      Just ignore all the stories of incompetence, theft, being drunk on the job, not being qualified to be Mall cops and worse for now. Consider for a moment that the methods being employed continue to become more and more invasive with less and less results. Honestly ask yourself: When was the last time you heard about an actual terrorist getting caught in a screening instead of a cancer patient being humiliated or a 4 year old being groped?
      Can’t remember one?
      That’s because the answer is NONE. In 10 years, NONE. Zero. Zip.

      Read up on the TSA and how imperfect they are. Start here. Do your own homework.

      Article from 2007 and NOTHING has improved; test runs still get by the screeners:

      2008, still failing 60% of the time:

      2010, Slate asks the same question – how many have they caught. Can’t come up with one instance:

      2011, TSA expands beyond the airport:

      More at LA times:

      2012, still failing basic tests:

      2012, screening isn’t just for the check point anymore: Read:

      The TSA is funded to the tune of 7.85 billion and up. The agency is now moving into bus terminals, subways and train stations. They even have a mobile unit with the same onboard scanner as in the airports only this one no one has the chance to say no to it.

      So…Safety at what cost?

      • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

        I have had “enhanced pat downs,” not only in the USA, but in Morocco, Sri Lanka, and the Netherlands that I can think of right now. It’s a momentary intrusion, not a personal insult. I’ve also been through “normal” security in Ben Gurion Airport in Israel. Trust me, you would not want to spend the two hours waiting in line, being questioned by three different teams of two interrogators, and going through your bags, in addition to the metal detector check. If you get the “enhanced” there, you will be stripping down. That’s happened to US Government contractors I know.

        To answer your other points:

        1. The obvious reply to the “results” question is that the searches are a deterrent to people carrying weapons and bombs into planes. The measures of effectiveness are bombs not going off on planes and people not hijacking planes with guns, not how many people get caught. If you stopped or relaxed the searches, don’t you think that might change?

        2. Incompetence is a human condition. So are things like people showing up drunk. These things happen all over the world. Again, there are no perfect systems. You find theft, corruption, rape in the military, for example – is that the way you characterize the military? Any large agency is going to have some bad apples. The question is, have the bad apples taken over, like they did in many archdioceses of the Catholic Church or in Enron?

        3. I agree with you on expanding TSA’s scope of work – they have no business running checkpoints on highways or stopping people in bus or train stations.

        But the aircraft security thing is run more intrusively in most places in the world.

      • superdestroyer

        So what should replace the TSA at the airports. What do you think would happen is all of the x-ray machines, metal detectors and guards were removed from the airport.

        Nitpicking the TSA is one thing but none of the nitpickers ever proposes what would be acceptable. If you are not going to search the elderly or people claiming to be sick, then what is the point of having any security?

        • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

          Correct again. Their only alternative is “search other people, not me.”

        • Vagabond661


          • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

            Obviously, profiling can easily be beaten, and it does not defend against the random angry nutball. For example, many of the deranged mass shooters which plague America, and elsewhere in the world have been white males with no records.

          • Mass shooters … which wouldn’t have been stopped by the TSA anyway… unless you want to put cordons around movie theaters and schools.

            The problem with a nanny state is that the populace becomes more and more helpless and unable/unwilling to cope with things.

            Maybe profiling can be beaten, maybe not. It’s going to be difficult to get a granny in a wheelchair to carry your bomb on board, and any watchful parent is going to be suspicious of folks loitering around the ticketing areas trying to slip bombs in their kid’s backpacks. I believe the standard questions about ‘has anyone asked you to carry something for them’ or ‘have you had control of your luggage’ will suffice there. And you can’t deny there have been certain common traits among the hijackers…

          • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

            Don’t be so literal- minded. An angry white male might decide to destroy a plane rather than shoot up a McDonald’s.

          • Why?

            Usually the AWM seems to expect to survive what they’re doing. Like that asshole in Denver, surrendering to the police. They’re looking to make a statement, not just suicide spectacularly. They can do that by strapping on a bomb vest and going to a Black Friday sale. Much easier, and they don’t have to buy a ticket to go through security.

            Sorry – I just don’t buy the ‘AWM might blow up a plane’ thing.

          • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

            Didn’t you see Airport? Plus we had that white guy who crashed his plane into the IRS building.

            And, a lot of mass shooters did kill themselves:


            I agree that there are easier ways to be a terrorist, but for some reason the terrorists are fixated on planes. It’s like a shiny object for them.

          • AWGs don’t seem fixated on plane terrorism – the guy who crashed his small plane into the IRS had a hate-on for the IRS (which is kinda understandable, at times…) while Airport was… fiction.

            You’re pulling my chain, aren’t you? 😉

          • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

            Partly, yes. But part of security is to guard against the possible scenario.

          • Vagabond661

            Obviously profiling does work. I read a story about a country that utilizes profiling. It was Israel which knows something about terrorism. Here:

            The TSA is just another failed government institution. Just like Obamacare(tax) will be.

          • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

            Did you read the article you just linked to?

            I think not, it supports my view:

            Ron denies the profiling charge. “Speaking from a security point of view, it would be professionally stupid to divert attention from non-Arab people,” he says. “For example, the worst attack on Ben Gurion was carried out by Japanese in 1972. If we focus on ethnic groups, we will miss what the enemy already understands: using a non-Arab person to carry out an attack might succeed.” Robbins agrees, calling behavior pattern recognition the opposite of racial profiling. “With profiling, you select a group of people and just look at those people,” he says. “That won’t work. For example, you probably wouldn’t talk to a Tim McVeigh. You have to take the focus off profiling and analyze behaviors. This is what will help us to keep our airport safe.”


            Have you been through airport security in Israel? I have. As I said, they run everybody through a series of interrogations and searches that make the TSA look like nothing. Most people would prefer the TSA, because the Israeli method takes a lot of time. I was impressed with the obviously high level of training of their staff, but you spend a lot of time waiting on line and talking to them.

            Also, from the number of white Anglo-Saxon US Government contractors I know that the Israelis have detained at the border and questioned at length, I suspect airline security is not the only motive for a lot of that. Intelligence gathering is.

          • Vagabond661

            Of course I read the article. Racial profiling is too simplistic and I was not talking about that. By profiling, I meant what they do there at that airport.

            This was above the section where you cut & pasted so I assume you read it.

            “With Ron’s help, Logan implemented a program developed at Ben Gurion and designed to ferret out people who may intend to do harm at the airport.
            Called behavior pattern recognition or BPR, the program has trained more than 100 state police troopers who provide security inside and around the airport. “Our troopers are in a proactive mode, using their skills and training to observe passenger behavior,” says State Police Major Thomas Robbins, director of aviation security for the Massachusetts Port Authority (Massport), which owns and operates Logan.”

            Talking is a lot less invasive than genital pat downs. Unless you are into those kinda things.

          • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

            Obviously, you have not kept up with the news about that Boston program since then:


            BOSTON — More than 30 federal officers in an airport program intended to spot telltale mannerisms of potential terrorists say the operation has become a magnet for racial profiling, targeting not only Middle Easterners but also blacks, Hispanics and other minorities.

            In interviews and internal complaints, officers from the Transportation Security Administration’s “behavior detection” program at Logan International Airport in Boston asserted that passengers who fit certain profiles — Hispanics traveling to Miami, for instance, or blacks wearing baseball caps backward — are much more likely to be stopped, searched and questioned for “suspicious” behavior. . . . .

            At a meeting last month with T.S.A. officials, officers at Logan provided written complaints about profiling from 32 officers, some of whom wrote anonymously. Officers said managers’ demands for high numbers of stops, searches and criminal referrals had led co-workers to target minorities in the belief that those stops were more likely to yield drugs, outstanding arrest warrants or immigration problems. . . . .
            The practice has become so prevalent, some officers said, that Massachusetts State Police officials have asked why minority members appear to make up an overwhelming number of the cases that the airport refers to them.
            “The behavior detection program is no longer a behavior-based program, but it is a racial profiling program,” one officer wrote in an anonymous complaint obtained by The Times.

          • Vagabond661

            Obviously those 30 federal officers didn’t read what you cut & pasted from the article. Obviously this is proving my point.

            They didn’t use “behavior detection”. Unless they behavior they decided to detect fit their racial profiling. Obviously.

          • herddog505

            I think “profiling” in this case means something rather different than running a background check. Further, it often comes out after the smoke has cleared and the bodies have been shuffled off the morgue that the nutball shooters were hardly guys who just snapped and started blasting five minutes later, but rather had exhibited signs of screwball behavior for months.

            You mentioned the movie “Airport”. It seems to me that even the most dimbulb police officer would smell a rat when a passenger like that tried to board a plane: “Dur, that guy sure is sweatin’ a lot. Dooeeee, and he’s clinging to that briefcase like it’s got a billion bucks in it. Derp, maybe I’ll ast him some questions…”

            As it stands, we aren’t even looking for such obvious signs, being content to rely on technology and invasive, unwarranted gropings that force men to stand idly by while their wives and children get felt up by total strangers, or else wind up in a holding cell and on a no-fly list if the words, “Take your g*ddammed hands off my little girl” escape their lips.

        • I’m not advocating for a replacement or removal of metal dectectors and security, but a scaling back of clear stupidity. I hardly think groping children, the elderly and ill has been effective in combating terrorism, except perhaps to terrorize said individuals.
          Also, what Vagabond661 said.

      • LL, I’m going to take exception to something you posted here – that there have been no terrorists found in 10 years.

        We haven’t HEARD of any being found. I don’t believe that the TSA and various other agencies internationally haven’t found ANY attempts. Every so often I hear of ‘celebrities’ being caught accidentally carrying firearms through screening, so it’s pretty obvious that their equipment can detect things like that.

        But actual terrorist attempts? I don’t want to hear about those, because if I do, then it’s pretty clear that whoever Achmed the Dumbass Bomb Carrier’s handlers are will hear about it, and they’ll KNOW what Achmed’s attempted technique was. They’ll know it didn’t work – and they’ll try something else. Better for Achmed to just be quietly detained than make a big thing over how they caught him.

        Then again, a reporter going…

        “He was caught because he was wearing an “I’m Making A Big Noise For Allah” T-shirt and carrying a half-pound of PETN in his carryon. TSA detected it using their latest tricorder-based scanners which (incidentally) detect quasi-omicron particle emissions from explosives but those particles can be blocked by a moderate layer of lead foil or putting it inside a nest of a half-dozen lead-lined photographer’s film bags. Not that we’re recommending you do that, of course – it’s just for information…”

        … might actually be of help. As would be an announcement before takeoff that anyone assisting in stopping a serious hijacking attempt would receive $100,000, and 5 free first-class round-trip tickets anywhere in the world.

        Extending TSA beyond the Airport is a Bad Idea. We don’t have a problem in the US with bus or train bombings, and doing random checkpoints on the highway is just plain nuts. If it’s a method of making sure that people will be conditioned to automatically COMPLY with TSA orders (as their ‘Bravo’ or ‘Freeze’ program seems to be) – wherever or whenever, then fuck ’em. Blow out the whole program, scale it back to magnetometer checks, and call it good.

        As you point out, we’re spending a hell of a lot on the TSA. We’re spending $8 bil a year, when a 747 costs about $225 million, and 500 passengers with $1 mil life insurance policies each would mean we could lose about 9 fully-loaded planes a year and not hit what we spend on security theater. We seem to be operating on the assumption that human lives are infinitely valuable – yet the individual’s dignity and convenience is of little to no value at all.

        • Come to think of it, it’s about the equivalent of spending $100,000 a year on insurance for a $10k car, with a $20k deductible. Financially it makes no sense. Emotionally, it might make SOME sense – but not a whole lot.

          It really is security theater, for the most part.

          • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

            C’mon, you know the economic effects of a bombed plane are far greater than the value of the plane and passenger payouts.

          • Is it worth $8 billion a year?

            The bombed plane is a terror instrument, made even more so by our media. 9/11 was such a kick in the nuts because it was the first time anything like that had been tried – and the coverage pushed the idea that we ought to be in FEAR at all times. And as I said – the concept was that Thou Shalt Not Resist The Hijacker.

            Won’t happen a second time, I think…

          • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

            Yes, just in lost bookings and higher insurance premiums alone. Then move on to second-order effects in the economy.

        • Point taken on reporting when and if they do find actual terrorists in their screenings; however we also need to acknowledge most of their backwards techniques for boarding planes with bombs up their arses usually takes place in airports OUTSIDE the United States and we hear about said failed attempts in detail rather rapidly.

          • Quite true. But, I think, that’s because there’s too many witnesses. Someone trying to light their shoe on fire is rather noticeable.

  • ackwired

    After 9/11 most Americans were anxious to give up some liberty for security. This is how the duopoly responded.

    • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

      And your solution to the problem of bombs and guns on commercial aircraft is?

      We agree on a lot of things, but TSA searches are trivial compared to total electronic surveillance and information databases on all Americans, “no fly” lists without due process, paramilitary police raids, tasering people for jaywalking, and suppression of public protests.

      • 9/11 was a success only because the people had been trained over the decades to not resist hijackers. A hijacking was something that’d be inconvenient, but rarely fatal, and good for stories afterward. Yeah, you’d be flown to Cuba or wherever, but you’d be unharmed.

        Nowdays, people know a hijacking means death. Every attempt where the hijacker’s made it past security and tried something on the plane has been stopped by the people on board because they know what will happen to themselves if they don’t.

        • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

          As I said, it was a clever expedient operation that exploited vulnerabilities like open cockpit doors.

          The main threat is not hijacking now, but destruction of the plane.

          • Don’t even think that there’s that much chance of that. Screening’s been pretty effective at keeping luggage bombs off, while passenger intervention’s stopped assholes with bombs in shoes and shorts.

          • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

            Yeah, that’s what we’re talking about – “screening” being “effective.”

          • After the Lockerbie bombing, the airlines had a real incentive to make sure there were no bombs in the luggage. And now with the TSA, there’s no iPads either…

        • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

          As I said, it was a clever expedient operation that exploited vulnerabilities like open cockpit doors.

          The main threat is not hijacking now, but destruction of the plane.

        • herddog505

          If passengers could be armed, those incidents would likely end even more quickly:
          “ALLAHU AK—”


          • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

            Given what I saw in the military and elsewhere, if passengers could be armed, I’d bet odds of accidental discharge causing depressurization and maybe worse would be a lot higher than hijacking.

          • herddog505

            ND = one or two people killed / wounded

            Terrorist bombing = everybody killed (plus people on the ground)

            Pretty easy decision, really.

            Further, a pretty sizable number of Americans carry. Contrary to liberal hyperventilating on the subject, we have neither Dodge City nor scads of people in hospital as a result of ND’s. If I was on a plane and knew that the person sitting next to me was legally armed (an off-duty law officer or holder of a CCW), I’d feel a damned sight safer.

          • As I posted elsewhere, you don’t need to worry about depressurization from a bullet hole. The physics just don’t go that route.

          • BTW, the ‘shot causing explosive decompression’ was looked at by the Mythbusters – and busted.

            Explosive decompression can occur when a bullet is
            fired through the fuselage of a pressurized airplane, causing the hole to grow dramatically and possibly cause the plane to break up as seen in movies.


            The pressure is not high enough and the hole is too small. Explosive decompression only occurred when a hole the size
            of a window was made with explosives. Even then, the rush of air could not suck Buster completely out of the hole. Lastly, there are proven instances of explosive decompression where the plane was still able to maintain control and land.

            (This myth was revisited in episode 38 and it was re-busted.)



          • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente


          • jim_m

            Don’t expect Chico’s views to have anything to do with reality and especially with science.

      • ackwired

        There were not bombs and guns on commercial aircraft before 9/11. The twin towers were taken down with boxcutters.
        We need reasonable airport security, and very few would object to it. I agree that people giving up the civil liberties that you listed is much more important than the TSA thing. But TSA inconveniences them. It is a symptom of what they have given to the government.

        • And like most symptoms, it’s indicative of an underlying problem.

        • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

          There were not bombs and guns on commercial aircraft before 9/11.

          What? Several airliners were brought down by in-flight bombs before 9/11, and there were multiple hijackings by firearms before 9/11.

          9/11 was a clever expedient operation that just raised the stakes.

          • ackwired

            But the bombings and hijackings had produced reactions by the airlines, airports, and their security. Nationalizing airport security was not necessary. It was done primarily to make us think that the government was doing something about 9/11. By the way, guns and bombs have gotten past TSA also.

    • Vagabond661

      Duopoly was the word of the month in case anyone missed it.

  • superdestroyer

    What should the alternative for airport security be? Should TSA not be checking for explosive traces? Should the TSA stop using metal detectors? If conservatives are against the TSA, the they need to propose an alternative. The endless rants about TSA are meaningless unless an alternative is given.

    • Ain’t a binary set, SD – either stripsearch or nothing. There’s a wide range of responses possible – but there’s always a tendency for government agencies to expand their mission because that gets them more money. Pre 9/11, it was considered sufficient to run people through magnetometers and confiscate knives and guns… but boxcutters were seen as tools.

      Dial back to that. No knives, no boxcutters, no guns. XRay carry-ons and checked baggage. No ‘Freeze’ exercises, no expansion of the TSA beyond the airport.

      • jim_m

        We need to go back to a private security that is answerable to the public. The TSA is a government bureaucracy that is not answerable to anyone but an inept and inactive Congress. If anything airport security is worse with the TSA running things than it would be with the private security applying the same rules. Plus private security would be more responsive to public complaints.

        Last, I sincerely doubt that we would have the theft issues that we have with the TSA if it were a private security firm. Private firms would have a liability risk if their employees were caught stealing form passengers. The TSA, as a government agency, does not.

        • The TSA should have, in my opinion, been a temporary thing. Government stepping in to provide time for private companies to ramp up security methods – and then transition their responsibilities to the private companies and be dismantled. But once they got established, that was pretty much it.

          Governmental inertia – want a concept.

        • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

          Baggage handlers steal a lot more than TSA do.

      • JWH

        Moreover, I would argue that there needs to be a larger degree of professionalism. Some of the horror stories out there don’t necessarily involve a TSA worker who does the invasive search professionally and with a minimum of fuss, but a TSA worker who abuses his/her authority.

        • I’ll give the TSA props – likely 90% of their line personnel are competent, professional and don’t abuse their authority. And they’ve got to deal with loads of people who don’t want to be there. It’s a shitty job. But it’s the ones who don’t act professionally, who do abuse their authority that give the rest of them a bad name. And with union involvement, it makes it really difficult to dump the bad ones.

          • herddog505

            I disagree with giving them props. TSA “officers” aren’t drafted; nobody forces them to take a job requiring them to X-ray and grope their fellow Americans. It’s an unpleasant job that they VOLUNTEERED to do.

            Personally, I’d have to be in a SERIOUS financial bind to take a job that required me to grope perfect strangers, including children, for nothing more than some hazy suspicion that they MIGHT have something on them at best, and a random check at worst. I add that, if I could think of a way to make it MORE shitty for them when I go through the line that wouldn’t get me tossed in jail, I would happily do so.

          • Okay. I see your point of view, might not agree with it totally though. The government, in it’s infinite wisdom, has decided that we need the TSA. I’ll not knock the folks who do their job and have to enforce bullshit rules they think are bullshit, I’ll knock the folks who ENJOY enforcing the bullshit for the thrill it gives them.

  • Wild_Willie

    I say this: The problem of 9/11 was the terrorists got into the cockpit and used the planes and passengers as a weapon. We put plans in place to keep that from happening. We do not need detailed passenger screening. It is a joke as has been proved time and again. ww

    • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

      And if the passenger gets on board with a firearm or breaching tool?

      9/11 style hijacking will probably not happen again, true, but a bomb on a 747 or A380, or 737 for that matter, is still a significant event.

      • jim_m

        TSA has already demonstrated that their methods are not sufficient to stop all firearms including ones mistakenly carried on board. One would presume that if a passenger could mistakenly carry a firearm through security that someone deliberately seeking to do so would be even more likely of finding success.

        Disarming everyone does not make everyone safe. it makes them prey, like sheep for the wolves. The reason man bred sheep dogs was that he needed a weapon amongst the sheep to protect them.

        • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

          Yeah, let everyone bring on weapons. That’ll work. Makes me think of Goldfinger.

          • herddog505

            Why WOULDN’T it work?

          • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

            See below – accidental discharges, for one thing.

          • jim_m

            Why WOULDN’T it work?

            Not because of the bogus and uninformed issue of accidental discharge that Chico so unhelpfully raises, but because 9mm rounds are such poor performers in terms of stopping power. Give them .40 or .45 cal weapons.

          • Issue a 9mm and 10 rounds to every passenger. Over the age of 18, of course. Who can pass a background check. (Build it into the cost of the ticket. In mass, it shouldn’t cost more than a buck each.) And can show minimal proficiency on the TSA range attached to the Airport. Strictly voluntary, of course – with a reward if needed ($100k, and 5 free first-class worldwide tickets for a verifiable hijacking attempt and deterrence) and a punishment ($500 fine to start, and escalating depending on what happened, all the way to murder) if misused. Oh, and a $5 ‘rental’ fee, with $15 back on firearm turn-in.

            Again – it’s deterrence. The terrorist wants to complete their mission, even if it kills them. The passengers, knowing that it’s them or the terrorist, will choose the death of the terrorist over the terrorist completing the mission.

            And that old movie trope of firing a bullet into the fuselage or the window causing the plane to explode is just garbage. Aluminum doesn’t unzip from a hole unless there’s already a lot of stress fractures in it. The pressure differential… well, it might be uncomfortable if you slap your hand over the hole, but it wouldn’t be as bad as the sucking of a vacuum cleaner. It’s only about 7-8 PSI, and with a bullet hole being less than half a square inch, it’s not a problem.

          • herddog505

            JLawsonIssue a 9mm and 10 rounds to every passenger… Strictly voluntary, of course – with a reward if needed ($100k, and 5 free first-class worldwide tickets for a verifiable hijacking attempt and deterrence) and a punishment ($500 fine to start, and escalating depending on what happened, all the way to murder) if misused. Oh, and a $5 ‘rental’ fee, with $15 back on firearm turn-in.

            No, no, NO! Don’t you know that the only people who can be trusted with firearms are soldiers, policemen, and government agents???? What sort of a country do you think this IS, with your mad notion that common people can be trusted with ANYTHING, especially a gun? Why, the mere presence of a gun turns people into mass murderers! Putting a single gun on a plane – unless in the hands of a highly-trained LEO (they are all practically SEAL Team Six caliber, you know) – is asking for aerial mayhem of the sort that hasn’t been seen since dogfights over Hanoi.

          • LOL.

      • Jwb10001

        You can not get a firearm past metal detectors and they are a little difficult to hide in someone’s vagina. Non metalic breaching tools are probably not terribly effective either I mean plastic knifes are the best way breach a cockpit door.
        I wonder how a real libertarian would feel about this, I think I’ll go check. Gary Johnson for president!

  • herddog505

    Question of the day:

    Would a President Romney end this plague upon humanity known as the TSA? Or would his fear of political fallout from a successful terrorist attack against a US aircraft lead him to leave it in place or, worse, double down?

    She pressed and swept across my crotch three times horizontally and three times vertically. In any other circumstance this would be sexual assault. [emphasis mine – hd505]

    Bingo. How the hell did we get to such a place in our country where not only can we be groped by government agents BUT WE’LL MEEKLY TAKE IT???

    Our nobel ancestors stacked up redcoats like cordwood for less. Yet, here we are with many of our fellow citizens stoutly defending the government’s “right” to do this to us. It’s not even “do it to Julia!”; it’s “do it to me!”


  • 914

    Anyone gropes my privates and they’d be knocked out in 1 second

  • dcnj

    why aren’t more people upset about this?

  • JWH

    I think we’re stuck with TSA in its current form or worse. After a decade, it’s now an entrenched bureaucracy with its own advocates and constituents, and it is nigh impossible for Congress or the president (or their respective staffs) to fundamentally change an entrenched agency.

    Moreover, no member of Congress wants a challenger to accuse him of letting airport security go lax and potentially let a bomb through. So the Congresscritters are just going to nod along whenever TSA talks about how security just NEEDS to stay the same as it currently is, or grow even more invasive.

    Because if a person can go through airport security without Seven Minutes in Heaven with the TSA …. then the terrorists have already won.

  • JWH

    Note: By themselves, the invasive patdowns are not the biggest problem. The biggest problem is TSA workers’ lack of professionalism … and certain workers’ willingness to use their position of power to satisfy petty, vindictive grudges.

  • panhead20

    “Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in the arsenal of every arbitrary government. Among deprivations of rights, none is so effective in cowing a population, crushing the spirit of the individual and putting terror in every heart.”
    Justice Robert Jackson, chief U.S. prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials

    I will not subject myself nor my family to needless radiation exposure nor TSA molestation. My family and I will not be flying until the TSA changes these procedures.

    T – Terrorists
    S – Searching
    A – Americans

  • Pingback: The TSA Molestation Files | The Sound of Freedom()

  • GarandFan

    I no longer fly, and will not until TSA gets some adult management. Too bad the rest of the public is not of the same mind. Money talks. People stop flying, airlines will be screaming at Bruno and her pal Barry.

  • Fisher1949

    This is reprehensible. They have molested three other passengers in the past week.

    Last week breast cancer survivor, Marcia Deitrick, was molested by TSA in Kansas City last week and was refused a private pat down. A few days later a dying leukemia patient, Michelle Dunaj, was forced to lift her blouse and remove her bandages to expose a feeding tube in full view of other passengers even though she repeatedly requested that she be taken to a private area.

    A male passenger, Steven deForest, opted out of the scanner in Las Vegas and was smacked in the testicle by an irate TSA screener in retaliation.

    Two weeks ago an ABC sting operation resulted in the arrest of TSA screener Andy Ramirez who stole the iPad from an Orlando checkpoint.

    One week earlier, TSA screener at Ft. Lauderdale, Andrew Smeal, was arrested for child pornography. He had been hired by TSA a month before while he was under investigation by the FBI. Clearly TSA is not properly investigating employees.

    Former TSA screener, Pythias Brown, told ABC News that theft is rampant at TSA and is accepted within the agency.

    There were 101 TSA workers arrested in the last 24 months including 13 arrested for child sex crimes, over 28 for theft, 12 for smuggling contraband through security and one for murder.

    TSA allows a known pedophile, Thomas Harkins to remain employed as a TSA Supervisor in Philadelphia five months after his past was exposed. What kind of agency turns a known child molester loose on our children?

    Does anyone really feel safer having people who will rub stranger’s genitals in public every day for $15 an hour in charge of security?

    In 2008 no one would have believed that people would allow a stranger to view a naked image of their child or permit the equivalent of a mall cop to rub their child’s privates in the middle of an airport. TSA must be replaced and those responsible for this travesty prosecuted.

  • Pingback: This Would Be Sexual Assault If It Wasn’t the TSA | Paul M. Jones()

  • boboadobo

    wow, those tsa goons some day will be charged with crimes against humanity! rosa parks would cry if she was still alive. security theater is a scam and violates our rights!

  • Pingback: Comprehensive List of Allowable TSA Protest Acts - FlyerTalk Forums()

  • marlio

    I havent flown since a few days after obama was sworn in. Due to the sexual, legal molestation by TSA, for no legitimate reasons, I can see, I refuse to ever fly again until this invasion of our americans liberty and freedom is removed (or its on a private airplane). I doubt if obama, clinton, jarrett , pelosi or reid go through any of these procedures. I detest what they they are doing and I refuse to fly again. The airplanes are nothing more than glorified buses any more, with their removal of free meals and even smaller seats and less leg room. All they care about, it appears, is cash, not the convenience and honor to serve the citizens who need a means to travel quickly. Its always just about making a little bit more profit.

  • Pingback: A Steam Pointer’s Open Letter to the TSA @ Stephen McDonald()