Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

March 5 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew

Close

New on NRO . . .

The Corner

The one and only.

Print   |  Text
 

Let’s Give Thanks for the TSA

In the coming days, millions of Americans will travel to celebrate the Thanksgiving holiday with family and friends. May I pose a novel idea? As we go through the airport screening line, let’s stop and say “thanks” to the men and women of the TSA who give up time with their families during the holidays to keep us safe from terror.

In the past few weeks, these patriots have been compared with Big Brother and accused of sexual assault. They’ve suffered the same kinds of public indignities the Left has heaped on the men and women of the CIA — being accused of engaging un-American and unlawful behavior for doing the difficult and unpleasant work of protecting the country. They deserve better.

Can any of us imagine the debate we’ve had in recent weeks unfolding in the days immediately following Sept. 11, 2001? Would any of us have objected to the deployment of millimeter-wave scanners had the technology been available then? The current uproar could happen only in a country that has begun to forget the horror of 9/11. Indeed, it appears many in the country have forgotten. A new Washington Post–ABC News poll found that 66 percent of Americans say that “the risk of terrorism on airplanes is not that great.” Sixty-six percent.

This just four years after al-Qaeda nearly succeeded in blowing up seven transatlantic flights departing London’s Heathrow Airport — with more than 1,500 passengers on board — headed for New York, Washington, Chicago, Montreal, Toronto, and San Francisco. This just eleven months after an al-Qaeda operative succeeded in sneaking a bomb onto a plane in his underwear and nearly blew it up over the city of Detroit. This just weeks after al-Qaeda succeeded in getting two package bombs on board aircraft — including passenger planes — that were designed to blow up over the Eastern seaboard of the United States. If we have learned anything about al-Qaeda in the years since 9/11, it is that they are obsessively focused on destroying planes.

If a passenger who is supposed to be seated near us on our next flight has a bomb in his underwear, I suspect most of us would prefer that the explosive be uncovered when he tries to get through airport security — not when a Dutch tourist sees the passenger in the row ahead of him try to set it off and dives across the plane to stop him, as happened on a flight to Detroit last Christmas.

In the last two weeks, I have been through TSA screening eight times — and not once was I asked to go through the millimeter-wave machine, or undergo an enhanced pat-down. Odds are that most of the 2.2 million passengers who will go through airport security each day during this holiday weekend will have a similar experience. On the last leg of my trip, I finally asked to go through both procedures to see what all the fuss was about. No one touched my junk.

Some critics have argued that the terrorists are more likely to attack us in other ways that can’t be stopped by the new screening procedures. That is the same argument the Left uses against Ballistic Missile Defense. They say our enemies more likely to attack us with suitcase nuke that has no fingerprints than with a ballistic missile that has a return address. Well, just because we face the danger of suitcase bombs does not mean that we should not defend against the danger of ballistic-missile attacks. If a burglar wants to break into our homes, we all know he can bust through the window — but that does not mean we leave our front doors unlocked when we go to bed at night.

The same logic applies to airport screening. Yes, the terrorists can try to sneak explosives on board in other ways (such as hiding them in body cavities). But if we stop screening for the methods they have attempted to use in the past — shoe bombs, liquid explosives hidden in sports drinks, and, yes, underwear bombs — we would be inviting them to use those methods again. Remember the outrage we all felt last Christmas that a terrorist managed to get through airport security with a bomb in his underwear? Well, imagine the outrage we would feel if it happened again because the TSA failed to deploy readily available technology that had a high likelihood of uncovering such a bomb — especially if the terrorist succeeded in blowing up the plane this time.

Some say it is ridiculous to apply screening procedures to children and the elderly. But we know that the terrorists have strapped bombs onto children and used them to get past our security in places like Iraq. Think they would hesitate to do the same here in America? If we announce that children and older travelers are exempt from screening, the terrorists will use children and older travelers to get bombs onto planes.

Some argue that the enhanced screening is a violation of our Fourth Amendment rights. No, it is not. Unlike buying health insurance, buying a plane ticket is still a purely voluntary activity in this country. We all agree to submit to screening when we decide to travel by plane. If we don’t want to go through the electronic screening, we can choose to have a pat-down instead. And if we prefer neither, we can drive, take a bus, or travel train. No American is forced through the enhanced screening procedures against his or her will.

Some say we should use profiling instead. Profiling should absolutely be a key part of our layered defenses against terrorist attack. But profiling alone is insufficient, and is not as easy as it may seem. Just as the terrorists adapt their tactics to get around our screening procedures, they will adapt to get around profiling. We know this because Khalid Shiekh Mohammed told us so. As I recount in my book, Courting Disaster, after KSM was captured and questioned by the CIA, he told the agency that after the 9/11 attacks he assumed we would be profiling for Arab men — so he recruited a cell of Southeast Asian terrorists to carry out the “second wave” of attacks. This cell — known as the Ghuraba cell — included trained pilots and suicide operatives who had met with Osama bin Laden and pledged to carry out martyrdom missions for him. They were captured hiding out in Karachi, Pakistan, awaiting instructions from the al-Qaeda leadership. Their mission was to fly an airplane into the Library Tower in Los Angeles.

When al-Qaeda deployed an operative to blow up a plane over Detroit, they did not send an Arab man — they sent a Nigerian. The terror ground al-Shabab — al-Qaeda’s new affiliate in East Africa — has recruited more than 20 American citizens as foreign fighters. Most are of Somali descent. One — Zachary Adam Chesser — is a white kid from Oakton, Va., who converted to Islam and is now serving a prison sentence for trying to join al-Shabab as a foreign fighter. Al-Qaeda recruits suicide bombers from all over the world — including right here in the U.S. It is not a simple matter to profile against such a diverse array of threats. Profiling is essential, but it is not a replacement for effective airport security.

We need to be crystal clear: As we gather with our families to carve the Thanksgiving turkey, the terrorists are gathering as well — in caves in Waziristan, Yemen, East Africa, and other fronts in the War on Terror — to plan the next attack. The tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks is less than a year away. Al-Qaeda planned to mark the fifth anniversary by blowing up seven planes headed to North America (which is why liquids in carry-on luggage are now required to be in containers no bigger than 3.4 ounces). They may very well be planning something equally spectacular for the tenth anniversary. So when we stop to give thanks for all our blessings this weekend, let’s give thanks for the people who spend their days and nights working to stop the terrorists from succeeding — including the men and women of the TSA.

If you travel by plane this holiday weekend, you’ll have a chance to do so in person.

New on The Corner. . .


COMMENTS   97

EXPAND  

   11/23/10 13:55

Can I ask a uncomfortable and graphic question? I'm sorry to ask it, but that's where we are in this. What, precisely, can be hidden in one's crotch which cannot be wrapped in a plastic sleeve and hidden in the rectum? Do we think suicidal terrorists wouldn't do such a thing?

It seems to me the only viable option is a human-interview based system like the Israelis use.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/23/10 13:55

Righhhhht .... Thanks TSA, for stopping the "shoe bomber" and the "underwear bomber" - I'm sure you'll do just as well with the "rectum bomber".

BTW, the former chief security officer of the Israel Airport Authority says, "I don't know why everybody is running to buy these expensive and useless machines".

External Link 

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
FJ Harris
   11/23/10 13:56

Silly ideas. There is no evidence that this horrible government mess ever stopped any terrorist.
In fact it took the Feds and their rules to produce 9/11.
Remember, 'just sit back and enjoy the ride to Havana'.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/23/10 14:00

I'm all for giving thanks for people doing the real work of protecting our country. Doing electronic strip searches and police frisking for the sake of protecting the skies, though, is not something for which the TSA merits thanks. Sorry, but enacting a police state with the gentle advice that, "Well, you can travel ANOTHER way," is nothing something I'd consider to be a "conservative" position. Travel is a fundamental liberty, especially in the 21st century, where families, employers, and customers are dispersed around the globe. And, if this is successful, how long until we get to have similar intrusions on buses, subways, trains, and the like?

The backscatter x-rays and pat downs wouldn't have stopped the 9/11 plotters, Richard Reid, or the Christmas bomber. It certainly wouldn't have stopped the printer cartridge bomb-test from a few weeks ago. What the TSA is doing is a violation of the fourth amendment and, worse, it's ineffective and insulting.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
G W Hayduke
   11/23/10 14:01

Are you out of your mind? Why don't you get down on your knees and lick their boots? As Ed Abbey once wrote, they are the proud, sensitive, tough flunkies of the police state.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/23/10 14:02

Yes, by all means we should all give thanks for groping. No need to ask Gloria Allred would say, she said it felt good, hadn't been felt up for years.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Loren
   11/23/10 14:02

And the TSA stopped exactly ZERO of those attacks.

It is bad theater, at best.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/23/10 14:03

So the best way to protect our freedom is to become a police state?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Rick Bomstein
   11/23/10 14:07

What a truly sad way to view the world - to be so terrified of death that you are willing to cede all personal dignity and respect for yourself, simply for this illusory feeling of security. The world is a risky place, and we will all die - no matter how many people's rights we violate in the name of "safety."

We used to worry about whether the terrorists would "win." To hear Mr. Thiessen tell it, they won long ago...

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Spaz2.3
   11/23/10 14:07

I agree with the first sentence, but the rest of your post...not so much. The TSA haven't prevented any terrorist attacks that I'm aware of...and any that have been prevented were the result of regular citizens being hyper-aware of their surroundings.

I fly quite often...and if there's a more obnoxious, rude and completely unqualified bunch of folks than the TSA, I have yet to come across them. Granted, that might be a result of having to deal with the public day in and day out...and I don't wish that on anybody. But you seem to be comparing the TSA to the FBI, CIA or Police...and that's like comparing your Postman to a Navy SEAL.

Sorry - but when am I supposed to thank the TSA? When they're feeling me up looking for explosives, or when they get to ogle my private parts going through the scanner?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/23/10 14:08

So, basically, it's okay to subject innocent travelers to the kind of treatment that would lead to a court martial if a soldier did it to a detainee, or if a priest did it to an altar boy, or if a scout leader did it to one his charges.

That it's being done by a Government bureaucrat in the name of our safety, that makes it okay.

And I suppose when a terrorist finally does get on a plane with explosive stuffed into his orifice, it will be perfectly reasonable for the TSA to conduct body cavity searches on little girls and crippled old men.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/23/10 14:08

MyKu:

I will say "Thank you!"
when they give me some post-grope
flowers and cab fare.

------------

Of course the actual human beings in the TSA garb are just that...actual human beings. They're not getting paid a whole lot to [irritate] a whole lot of people off. They are following policy set - at least indirectly - by our elected leadership. Don't take it out on them unless your specific situation calls for it.

An overwrought parallel might be not spitting on your average soldier because you don't like the Iraq war.

Parallel falls apart because I ain't thanking the TSA, though. The Mickey Mouse operation we have right now is causing more harm than it is preventing.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/23/10 14:08

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

-Benjamin Franklin, February 1775

----
Security Theater is not security. The question is no longer "would you tolerate this to prevent a terrorist attack?", but rather "How much more will you endure before the intrusion becomes intolerable?".

Corona jokes about a rectum bomber, but the tactic was already tried in August 2009. Will a rectal exam be the line in the sand? I appreciate the sentiment, Marc, but I'd rather see a post from you wherein you determine how much "security" is too much. Do you have such a line?

Also, I look forward to hearing your reaction after your naked backscatter photos go viral.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/23/10 14:09

Is this satire? This is satire, right? If it's satire, I'm not sure I get it. If it's NOT satire, then it's just sad.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/23/10 14:12

No. Just, no.
There is no total elimination of risk, no matter how thoroughly they grope and prod every orifice and crevice of passengers. And do you think the only target terrorists would or could ever consider is an airplane? What about buses? Trains? Subways? Or even a shopping mall or nightclub full of people? There is risk in stepping outside your front door! We shouldn't be thanking someone for violating our private selves for an inconsequential decrease in odds of a plane being blown up.
And what about that Constitution thing (does ANYONE remember that thing? Anyone at all?) and what it says about illegal search and seizure.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/23/10 14:16

So when they leave off targeting planes and go for other modes of transportation? It's time once again for Pastor Niemoller's famous line:

First they came for airline passengers and I did not speak out because I did not fly.

Then they came for the train passengers and I did not speak out because I did travel by rail.

Then they came for the bus travelers and I did not speak out because I would not set foot in a Greyhound bus station.

Then they came for me in my car and there was no one left to speak out for me because I lived in a police state.

I won't be thanking the TSA officers who have yet to produce one tangible result for all the billions of dollars of waste and violations of our rights that they have imposed on us. Traveling by plane is a voluntary act, so is working for the TSA.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/23/10 14:17

I'm sure as we're all plummeting to the ground from 35,000 feet after an explosion has ripped our plane apart we'll each be thinking "At least I wasn't subjected to an intrusive TSA pat down."

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/23/10 14:17

We all know that 99.9% of travellers pose no threat, so do we really need to screen 100% to catch the troublesome 0.1%?

Why not combine behavior-profiling with a RANDOM screening process? Give a tighter screen to everyone who is "suspicious" in any way (due to profile info or behavior at the airport), plus a random 10% of everyone who isn't suspicious. And do it in such a way that no one is ever sure why they're getting screened, but everyone knows it could/might happen to them. Bottom line is we should target terrorists not underwear or shoes!

Corona: "rectum bomber" -- is that a phrase from somewhere? Because I've been thinking if I were Al Qaeda the next thing I'd do would be to put a bomb up someone's butt and try to get them on an airplane -- not so much to see if it would work, but to dare the TSA to initiate body cavity searches! You know the bad guys are laughing at us right now. The underwear bomber did not fail, due to our over-reaction it has turned into a win for their side!

Another thought: aren't the "naked x-ray" and the pat-down both going to be particularly offensive to orthodox muslim travellers above all others? In order not to offend muslims with the odor of profiling, everyone (including muslims) is now subject to something that muslim modesty will find particularly humiliating! This policy is playing out as an absolute PR disaster -- Obama's next Katrina?

Final thought: what if a terrorist gets through and blows up a plane even with this Big Brother system in place? Then what?? I don't believe we'll ever be 100% safe, and I'm not convinced this new system has more than a marginal impact on safety (especially compared to better alternatives that wouldn't be such a hassle and make us look like fools to the rest of the world.)

Massive inconvenience for all in the name of political correctness to protect the sensibilities of a few? Warning: Government bureaucracy at work!

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   11/23/10 14:19

Sorry. Can't get on board for this. When DHS and TSA were hastily created in the wake of 9/11 anyone with half a brain knew that we were headed for yet another ineffective and expensive bureaucracy.

I used to travel constantly and have rarely encountered a TSA agent I would hire for any job. My contention is that the TSA screeners we ended up with provide only a very expensive illusion of security. Because of the nature of the job, expect another overpaid government bureaucracy with no regard and overt hostility for the citizens they ostensibly serve.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
 ds
   11/23/10 14:20

Marc -- you say "Indeed, it appears many in the country have forgotten. A new Washington Post–ABC News poll found that 66 percent of Americans say that “the risk of terrorism on airplanes is not that great.” Sixty-six percent."

huh? The way the question is posed, the result is perfectly reasonable and not any reason to start running around like a nutcase saying "everyone's forgotten 9/11!" They asked, "not that great." Not *how* great? Mathematically the risk to any particular air traveler of being killed by a terrorist is miniscule -- a tiny rounding error compared to the risk that same traveler took getting to the airport. We're supposed to be alarmed that Americans are apparently not in a constant state of terror-induced panic that leads them to unrealistic assessments of the risk of air travel?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Load More Comments

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact