Responding to various points made in this thread:

To YesNo: I don't see where asking for some privacy in searches is equivalent to asking for no searches. The TSA gives you only two choices: consent to being groped(1) in public *Or* draw the scrutiny of Sauron by asking to be taken away for an unknown length of time to a private room for a private search. The latter "choice" is so risky that few will choose it. (i.e. one might have to wait a very long time(2), one might be put on a list, and the gut reaction people have to being separated from the group by authority- the adult version of being sent to the principals office- can be stressful.)

Is forcing a pregnant woman (or any person) to put some skin on display to all passers-by necessary? Prove it. What security goal is met that wouldn't also be met by having a few nearby privacy screens- translucent and shoulder high- available so other passengers cannot see the search? Why can't we ask that the TSA find multiple ways to accomplish a given goal- here, body pat downs- with multiple levels of privacy loss to choose from? Why does it have to be all or nothing, go with the one method that TSA bureaucrats came up with in some meeting or ask to be taken away to some back room?

As to the "we must accept anything the gov't asks because we're at war..." statements, well, no. First of all, criticising the gov't isn't just an all-American activity, it is *necessary to prevent bad ideas from remaining unchallenged*. Just because an idea is made to promote a good cause doesn't mean the idea itself is good or optimal. Especially if an idea came during an extra-emotional time- no matter how appropriate the emotions, decisions made in anger should later be reviewed in a less emotional state. We, instead, are going gung-ho on implementing any and all ideas in their original, anger/grief/fear driven form. And we treat criticism of the implementation as a rejection of the emotion that created it. Just because someone criticises a particular implementation doesn't mean they don't understand or don't agree with the goal.

And I still have a difficult time calling a response to terrorists a war, because that implies that the mass-murderers of 9/11 are warriors or soldiers, and I just cannot give them the dignity of that term. Yes, we know know that the world has changed, but it changed long before 9/11- we just became terribly aware of it that day (that a few individuals can cause death/destruction which used to require entire armies).

(1)pat downs can reach the upper thigh, the buttocks, the underwire area for women... areas that normally require an apology if you touch them accidentally. If circumstances require the security agents to touch these areas, they should be respectful, solemn and apologetic about it-- that you must do a painful act to further a good cause doesn't make the act less painful. They should not expect the passengers to just get used to it.
 
(2) similar to cases where passengers asked to be patted down by someone of the same sex when they weren't available. The wait could be 10-30 minutes, and they'd punish the request with extra-thorough bag searches.