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?
Again, your thoughts and comments are appreciated.
