Today's installment of security theater

[Southern_Man 0]

Rand Paul misses flight after refusing pat-down by TSA agents:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/rand-paul-in-pat-down-standoff-with-tsa-in-nashville/

Thank God the TSA were there keeping us safe. For the children.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[quade 4]

I hope he got a body cavity search out of it . . . for both their sakes.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 23]

Quote

I hope he got a body cavity search out of it . . . for both their sakes.

You first

for all the rest of us

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Then add this to the fray

Quote

White House sides with TSA in Rand Paul standoff
By Keith Laing - 01/23/12 01:24 PM ET

The White House is standing by the Transportation Security Administration in its standoff with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and his father, Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas).

The elder Paul called the TSA a "police state" Monday after Rand Paul was reportedly detained by TSA after he refused to take a pat-down from TSA officials at the Nashville International Airport.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said Monday that he didn't have any reaction to Paul's "police state" comments.

But Carney sided with the TSA saying, "I think it is absolutely essential that we take necessary actions to ensure that air travel is safe."

Unless of course this was a professor who is from a favored Obama university.

Then there would be outrage from the WH

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[grimmie 186]

I wonder why he refused a pat down.

[billvon 3,132]

>I wonder why he refused a pat down.

To get on the news. It worked.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>I wonder why he refused a pat down.

To get on the news. It worked.

Your a mind reader now?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[quade 4]

Quote

>I wonder why he refused a pat down.

To get on the news. It worked.

Which is why I'd hoped he got the body cavity search and the TSA had to get their hands dirty too. They're both at fault for this bit of insecurity theater.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,132]

>Your a mind reader now?

Nope, a Reuters reader.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>I wonder why he refused a pat down.

To get on the news. It worked.

Equally likely, given that TSA is already working on a bypass program for frequent travelers that have been proven to not be a threat (like, say, sitting Senators?), they saw an opportunity to harass a politician that is outspokenly against the TSA.

It worked.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>Your a mind reader now?

Nope, a Reuters reader.

And they say he refused the pat down to get into the news?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/23/us-usa-congress-randpaul-idUSTRE80M1HM20120123

Where?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[aphid 0]

Perhaps this is cogent?

Quote

The Paul staffer said TSA agents would not let Paul walk back through the body scanner and were demanding a full body pat-down.

So you forget (example only) 2 quarters in a pocket and set off the alarm. It's unreasonable to disclose them, drop them in a tray and be rescanned, instead having to:

Quote

complete the screening process (pat-down) in order to resolve the issue.

In my opinion that qualifies as a complete lack of common-sense by TSA.

[lawrocket 3]

I read two issues that could come out of this. Mike pointed out that people like sitting senators could bypass the screening. I don’t think that this is an appropriate way of doing things – exempting certain classes of political elite from the policies that apply to the peasants. If Rand Paul thinks that he should have been able to bypass security because he’s a Senator then he lost any support I may have.

If, on the other hand, Senator Paul stood up to security as a form of protest, then hat’s off to him. The outward statements indicate to me that he supports getting rid of the searches and perhaps he’s standing by it by practicing his actual beliefs.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

I read two issues that could come out of this. Mike pointed out that people like sitting senators could bypass the screening. I don’t think that this is an appropriate way of doing things – exempting certain classes of political elite from the policies that apply to the peasants. If Rand Paul thinks that he should have been able to bypass security because he’s a Senator then he lost any support I may have.

You misunderstood me - I stated that TSA is working on a 'trusted traveler' program, my mention of sitting politicians was an example of a *possible* trusted traveler, not a statement that TSA considers politicians to be so.

Quote

If, on the other hand, Senator Paul stood up to security as a form of protest, then hat’s off to him. The outward statements indicate to me that he supports getting rid of the searches and perhaps he’s standing by it by practicing his actual beliefs.

I think that's much more likely to be the case than what is mentioned in your first paragraph.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Unless of course this was a professor who is from a favored Obama university.

Then there would be outrage from the WH

You are a mind reader now?

[Andy9o8 3]

Quote

TSA administrator John Pistole

That's just too perfect.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Unless of course this was a professor who is from a favored Obama university.

Then there would be outrage from the WH

You are a mind reader now?

No, a CNN reader.

Link

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[quade 4]

Quote

I don’t think that this is an appropriate way of doing things – exempting certain classes of political elite from the policies that apply to the peasants.

Not to come to Rand Paul's defense, but . . . I believe there is a law prohibiting members of Congress from being detained while en route to or from their home districts and DC. I think there are exceptions like if they murdered somebody, but the rule as I understand it is in place to prevent police officers and the like from arresting them over issues they don't want them to vote on.

It's possible (probable) Rand Paul knows this rule and felt he could bypass the TSA by invoking it.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

If, on the other hand, Senator Paul stood up to security as a form of protest, then hat’s off to him. The outward statements indicate to me that he supports getting rid of the searches and perhaps he’s standing by it by practicing his actual beliefs.

I believe this.



and, if a lefty politician did this to get public attention on the problem - the "usual suspects" here would be calling him a hero, not just a media hound

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

the rule as I understand it is in place to prevent police officers and the like from arresting them over issues they don't want them to vote on.

I'm sure the big O would love to delete this law


just a random poke

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

>I wonder why he refused a pat down.

To get on the news. It worked.

Your a mind reader now?

I don't see poking at Billvon on this when, other lefties are being direct about their bias already in the thread. This can be read in both a positive or negative light.

1 - to get on the news to demonstrate the TSA policies as being ridiculous - i.e., to make an honest stand

2 - to just get more press in general for the elections

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>I wonder why he refused a pat down.

To get on the news. It worked.

Your a mind reader now?

I don't see poking at Billvon on this when, other lefties are being direct about their bias already in the thread. This can be read in both a positive or negative light.

1 - to get on the news to demonstrate the TSA policies as being ridiculous - i.e., to make an honest stand

2 - to just get more press in general for the elections

Do you know?

it was an honest question based on a very thin assumption

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

If, on the other hand, Senator Paul stood up to security as a form of protest, then hat’s off to him. The outward statements indicate to me that he supports getting rid of the searches and perhaps he’s standing by it by practicing his actual beliefs.

I highly doubt he was doing this for his own publicity. He's already established a rather high profile between his dad and his leadership on budget matters. I think it's pretty clear he doesn't believe in the activities of the TSA.

It's probably better than a GOP politico lead this charge, where the claim of soft on bad guys doesn't stick so easily.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

It's possible (probable) Rand Paul knows this rule and felt he could bypass the TSA by invoking it.

Sure...now you just need some proof that was the reasoning behind refusing the grope instead of his (clearly and many times repeated) view that the TSA is illegal and should be gotten rid of.

Occam's Razor and all that.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

I wonder why he refused a pat down.

Probably didn't want some dude fondling his junk.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"