http://blog.officer.com/2011/06/27/the-95-yr-old-wheelchair-bound-depends-we
aring-terrorist/

 


The 95-yr-old Wheelchair-bound Depends-wearing
<http://blog.officer.com/2011/06/27/the-95-yr-old-wheelchair-bound-depends-w
earing-terrorist/> 'Terrorist'?


Leave a comment on this
<http://blog.officer.com/2011/06/27/the-95-yr-old-wheelchair-bound-depends-w
earing-terrorist/#respond>  post below 

E-mail this Post to a Friend
<http://blog.officer.com/2011/06/27/the-95-yr-old-wheelchair-bound-depends-w
earing-terrorist/> 

http://blog.officer.com/images/contributor/borelli120x150.jpg
<mailto:[email protected]> Frank Borelli
Editor-in-Chief
Officer.com

It was with some distress that I read about the TSA's most recent
controversial search: apparently some TSA officers believed that a
95-year-old wheelchair-bound grandma presented so much of a threat that they
had to not only pat her down but asked her relatives to take her to the
bathroom to remove her adult diaper for closer inspection. I believe that
the mere fact some TSA agents found this necessary is indicative of how
ludicrous our security measures have become - but I blame it on our
country's drive to be politically correct in all we do.

Let's consider this for a moment, and I'll apologize up front for all of
those of you whom I offend. Rest assured, it's not my intent to be
offensive, but since some folks seem to be offended by what I consider
common sense, I'll apologize ahead of time knowing that I'll offend some of
you. Your comments are welcome and appreciated. Please say something more
than, "Frank, you're stupid."

What was it, exactly, that drove the TSA agents in question to single out
this little old lady for further investigation?

Was her name on a watch list? Not as far as anyone has reported.

Were those accompanying her suspicious? Not as far as anyone has reported.

Did she display any suspicious behaviors indicating evasion or nervousness?
Not as far as anyone has reported.

Does she belong to a demographic that has, in documented history, ever been
involved in a terrorist attack? Not as far as anyone has reported. but
perhaps her "crime" was that she belonged to a demographic so far
disassociated from terrorist acts that to prevent accusations of profiling
TSA agents decided she was the perfect person to screen more thoroughly.

"Huh?" Yeah, I had to think that too, but let me explain what I mean.

"Profiling" - investigating people further based on Constitutionally
protected statuses (race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age, etc) -
is illegal. Numerous cases have determined that it's unconstitutional to
treat someone different based on any protected status and have further held
that "profiling" does exactly that: treats them different based on protected
status.

So, while common sense may dictate that the TSA more thoroughly screen men
similar in demographic description to those who committed the attacks on our
country on September 11th, 2001, laws and policies prohibiting profiling
prevent them from doing that. Here is our biggest challenge as a result:

The people most likely to commit attacks on our country - based on
documented historical data - are less likely to be screened or further
investigated simply because, if they are, they'll immediately claim they
were treated prejudicially as a result of "profiling".

So what's left to do? What TSA did: screen and investigate those who are so
far out of the historically documented suspicious demographic as to be
ludicrous if you suspect them; the lady in question; the Congressional Medal
of Honor recipient; the last surviving WWII veteran; the double-amputee
Afghanistan war veteran returning home. Yeah, let's screen and investigate
those people because that way, when someone makes an accusation of
"profiling" we can point to all these other people we've treated
disrespectfully just to cover ourselves from such accusation.

I hate to say I think that's what's going on, but can anyone out there offer
me another good reason why this little old lady got treated this way while
I've personally seen scores of potential terrorists - in the historically
documented terrorist demographic - get treated almost as if they're royalty
when passing through the security gates?

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



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

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, 
[email protected].
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[email protected]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [email protected]
  Unsubscribe:  [email protected]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to