dubiousal, what has happened, post 9/11, that gives you the idea that the TSA, or in fact, any authority figure, DESERVES any respect?

Fuck the TSA! Have they found ANY bombs yet?

This was not a bomb threat. This was the TSA being stupid, again. The word "bomb" is not a threat. The real judgement-impaired party in this incident is the screener. Wasting time and resources for something like this is the real threat.

So Lex, you're trying to say that we should have the same
expectations going through airport security as living in jail?

A few years back I found myself in a facility for the judgment-impaired. I had a room to myself, so it certainly wasn't hard time.

The 'screws' would execute random room searches. You weren't supposed to see how they did the serches, but I saw they had a mirror on a stick, presumably to save themselves from bending down to look under the bed or climbing up on top of the closet.

So one day, I penned a note. I wrote "have a nice day" sdrawkcab and added a smiley face. I placed the note on top of the closet and forgot about it a few days later.

Well, some time later they searched my room and found the note. You can guess what happened: I was punished for "interfering with security."

My point? Actual security is irrelevant in these situations. Even disrespect is irrelevant in these situations. The number two red flag (after obvious stuff like contraband and weapons) is any indication that you are watching the watchers. This makes them *very* uncomfortable.

Go home and watch "silence of the lambs" a few times and you will understand exactly what they're afraid of.

Sit the kid down. Talk to him. I can even maybe live with detaining him and scaring him a bit straight. Call him a stupid, sarcastic punk. Perhaps - even a small fine or something. But people are missing the point:
he was arraigned on a felony charge.
That is some serious stuff. He'll have to go to court and pay thousands of dollars. He could have trouble getting into college, getting a job, getting an apartment, and may be restricted from flying again. The government will spend tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars literally making a Federal case out of this.
So while a slap on the wrist may be in order, the reactionary mountain-from-a-molehill culture of fear approach is messed up. Our federal courts don't need to be more backed up and threaten a kid's entire future just because some Bag Ape at the airport saw a note and thought: "BOMB! BAD! ME TELL!"

Brava, Teresa. Hell of a note. Well said.

I can't believe how many people here are saying -- and in many cases so sanctimoniously -- that the kid deserved to be pulled off the airplane. He wasn't a threat to anyone's safety. He left a note in his luggage that dissed the baggage checkers, and they took an extremely inappropriate revenge which they claimed was a security measure.

It wasn't. It had nothing to do with actual security. Harassing someone for having a "suspected terrorist" button also has nothing to do with actual security. You know Cartman's line about "You will respect my authority"? that's what this is about.

I don't know how old the person is who professed to be shocked that anyone could write such a foulmouthed note, but however long he's been on this planet, he can't have been listening very hard to the way some of his fellow human beings talk.

I'm not in a good mood about this. I've just come back from a trip, and when I unpacked I found the nice new pair of bonsai shears I bought in Portland have not come home with me. I distinctly remember putting them in the bag I checked. They were smallish, and wrapped in multiple layers of lilac tissue paper. I take it someone fancied them. I'd have put them in my carry-on bag, but of course that's impossible now.

Don't anyone tell me I should have mailed them to myself. If someone gets mugged while walking six blocks from their bank to their apartment, the appropriate response is not to tell them they should have mailed themselves the money as soon as they got it out of the ATM.

Other disappearances from my luggage over the last few years: Jewelry. Clothes. My digital camera. I've been told that if I padlock my bag and they decide to search my bag, they may "accidentally" destroy the zipper closings when they cut off the padlock.

There were a lot of pictures in that camera.

The airlines were lobbying for years before the 9/11 attacks to stave off any increase in airport security requirements. They handed off security to two companies, Argenbright and Huntley, whose only concern was to satisfy the letter of the law at the lowest possible cost. Actually providing airport security wasn't part of the calculation.

Pulling people off planes because they've left notes in their baggage that diss the searchers only convinces me that the air industry is no more serious about security than they ever were.

He teased the dog and got bit. Screwed the Hawaii trip. Punishment enough. I'd be surprised if it goes any further. At least he's learned what others haven't: just get on the plane and be happy the effin' thing lands where you want.

Dave (if you're reading this), pre-9/11, I don't remember physical searches of checked baggage being permitted. The bags were screened by machines and put in decompression chambers, but I don't believe they were supposed to be searched. Oh, theft happened, that's for sure. But the thieves didn't have the same opportunity they now have. You could lock your bag and that was that. Now, I don't know what the rules are.

As I suspected. Using name calling to help win arguments. I'm not really surprised.

As to the theft of items out of luggage... That has been going on for quite some time and well before 9/11. My last trip on a plane was back in Christmas of 1999. I had presents in my luggage, and when I arrived home, found that one of them had been taken. That and a couple of packs of playing cards. What I find really surprising was the gift was a video tape of a car race. Hardly worth taking.

To Dalke:
Luggage, gym bag, is there really a difference?

Ok, I'm finished again. Carry on with your ranting...

Edited by author 08-03-2003 10:46 PM
It seems hard to find the balance in this thread. Those mouthing the age old chant that kids must be punished for their behaviors that we "reasonable" adults deem inappropriate are contrasted by those who express semblances of respect for the TSA and such agencies.

We live in a world where engineered images of terrorism are beamed to the comfort of our living rooms and assimilated as truth by an unquestioning citizenry. Our judgement is clouded as we accept too much without question. The individual with the "questionable" judgement is a teenager. I trust his observation is closer to the truth than our judgement. We live in a culture of paranoia and how dare we accept that. How dare we inflict that upon our children. How dare we allow our government servants to treat us with disrespect!

Me thinks we become the children when we accept this as the way things are. We question too little, accept too readily, and do not apply enough discernment to what we are told. We do not hold those government SERVANTS accountable. We do not hold ourselves accountable.

Let's aim our arrows of indignation at the right target instead of each other. We know who was right and who was wrong in this situation. If you are indignant about what I say, start over at the first paragraph until it burrows into your frontal lobe.

Just my thoughts!

We should go all the way and make poor judgement a capital crime. It would solve the world's problems by wiping out every last human being on it.

Nah, dubiousalibi, I just find it humorous that your main argument is "he said naughty disrespectful words." Why resort for scintillant prose when calling you a fuckwad is so much more entertaining?

Your argument holds no water, unless you honestly believe that "disrespect" is a valid reason to bar someone from a flight.

The kid didn't do anything wrong. He said "fuck" a few times and pointed out that he did not have a bomb. How is that a threat?

Blah blah blah recalcitrant behavior -- the fact is, pally, that the kid's behavior is his right. He didn't harm anyone. He didn't threaten to harm anyone. He got ANGRY about the TSA's impropriety and expressed that.

Read the US's first amendment lately?

--sean

Next time I fly with a copy of a review describing a movie as "a real bomb" I'm going to be hauled off, becuase the word bomb is dangerous.....

Cory: we are doomed.

Edited by author 08-03-2003 11:30 AM
ok Sean. Brilliant, articulate response. You've obviously resorted to the gutter as your only retort. Keep on applauding recalcitrant behaviour in the community, instead of solving the real issue (the TSA's impropriety) the correct way. You make the world you want to live in, as I mutually suspect, let's hope we ain't in the same one.

Hell, I've felt like doing this a lot - particularly after I flew from Reno to Chicago Midway and, upon looking in my bags, realized all my underwear (ALL of it!) was gone.

I guess if you were an underwear fetishist, that'd be the best job in the world. But I'm definitely leaving a note next time - though not with the word "bomb."

Riiiiiiiight, so it's appropriate to bring legal charges and claim that the kid made a threat when it is clearly not a threat, because it was "disrespectful" and we live in a troublesome "current climate"?

Bullshit, ya idiot. Utter bullshit.

If he claimed he DID have a bomb and the article misquoted what he wrote, then yes, you have a point. But the statement expressed disgust at the bag searchers and pride in NOT HAVING A BOMB. If the use of the term "fuck" (presumably the modal expletive at use in that note) is what turns disgust into being a threat, then you clearly live in a different reality than most people.

I'm unwilling to overreact to this kid's behavior just cuz it's disrespectful. I'm willing to APPLAUD the kid's behavior because it's disrespectful to a group of people who have repeatedly stolen items from bags, stomped on political speech represented in bags, and gleefully violate the 4th amendment every time they do their jobs. They deserve no respect from me.

So, here's some more "foul-mouthed agitation for you": You're a fucking idiot.

--sean

Look, wiseanduncanny, I couldn't agree with you more. The TSA have completely overplayed this and it's quite obvious they have a complex and an image problem.

My issue is that kind of behaviour for a 17-year old kid is utterly unacceptable in this current climate and certainly doesn't warrant slap on the wrist and bed without supper. We're all quick to jump on the TSA's back when there's been a security breach, but as soon as they ramp up a 'zero tolerance' policy, we're on them again.

I must admit my anger is solely directed at the 'sarcastic brat' in complete disbelief that someone would write that with the intention of someone else reading it. What sort of a person seriously writes a foul-mouthed agitation note like that that doesn't expect consequences??

Certainly someone that has got away with far too much in their life so far and thinks they can extend this egotistical holiday.

Edited by author 08-03-2003 10:51 AM
Even if you quote the constitution,your a terrorist:


http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/FBIsuspect.html

The kid was being a sarcastic brat, no one's denying that. He was looking to provoke the bag searchers, and he clearly did which makes them look like bigger assholes than the kid.

Here's a good idea that I'm going to try out next time I fly. I'll put a copy of the 4th amendment in my possessions:

IV - Right of search and seizure regulated

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


I'd love to see someone pulled aside for that one.

--sean

Oh, I guess I forgot that "having respect for law enforcement" was a requirement to travel, "dubiousalibi." How silly of me!

--sean

Can I just point out that TSA not only rummages through your bag, they TAKE STUFF? According to widespread media reports, TSA has *settled* close to 500 thefts, for a total of near $40,000. They *admit* to hiring 85 convicted felons to do the rummaging!

Thank goodness for teen smart-asses that help the rest of us remember that we are prone to cower in deference to any random bunch of thugs that claim authority.

My wife pointed out that our local news paper (referencing the Associated Press quoted Ann Davis, who presented a different version of the wording of the note

> The note said, "Have you found the bomb yet?" and then "Nope, just clothes," according to Davis.

The critical difference is the use of a definite article: "the bomb" rather than "a bomb". It makes the hysteria seem almost justifiable. It just underlines my decision not to fly again until the War on Terror is over.

Some of you people are nuts. The note did not claim to have a bomb. It merely *mentioned* a bomb, in the context of denying one. A note hidden in one's luggage is NOT comparable to shouting fire in a crowded theater.

Stop quaking with fear and come back to reality, my friends.

What sort of outrageous bahaviour is this from any human? Let's put the legalities aside for a moment and check in with reality, he's far from being a kid. He's an adolescent smart-ass that is completely well aware of the sensitivities of the situation the world faces, yet chooses to use this as a platform gain a back slapping from his mates.

As opposed to the overly bureaucratic and grandstanding position the TSA may have taken over this case, I'm absolutely sick and tired of the complete lack of respect youth have for an authority. They use it as a playground for their social climbing, whilst the community and the legal system generally rollover meekly to the beat of political correctness.

This is a blatant combination of direspect and stupidity that deserves no sympathy.

I put a little something about my experince with losing something after a TSA search here-> http://www.2bangkok.com/2bangkok/news03c.shtml#1

Also there's a scan of the card TSA leaves behind and a link to the Post article about TSA being under pressure to stop theft by its inspectors.

This is not irritating to me, because it was a private exchange between the kid and the screener. He can make whatever point he wants, so long as he doesn't attempt to turn it into a circus performance. For that reason alone, I see this as a completely different situation than the John Gilmore case.

I am actually even more outraged by this. What we have here is a kid who knew his bag was going to be searched for no reason, and didn't like it. I've never checked any luggage on a plane for that reason, but now I know that people will be digging through all the bags.

My concern is that they may find something -- completely legal -- which causes suspicion or incites prejudice. A Communist pamphlet, ladies underwear, or anything that might appear to be out of the ordinary. I would definitely leave a note if I ever checked a bag.

Won't get into it here, but I have personal experience with this kind of thing. You don't mess with insane children, especially when they're over 30 and have legal authority. So, no mention of the word "bomb."

What really outrages me, though, is that this is a FELONY charge. Felony means it carries at least a one year sentence. Something which they admit didn't even cause them to bat an eyelash deserves a year behind bars? They're basically threatening him with jail time for a bad joke. They know for a fact that it was not a bomb threat, and it could not possibly be interpreted as a bomb threat, but the TSA is now acting as a comedy critic.

Edited by author 08-03-2003 01:29 AM
Dave Metzener:You walk into an airport putting a label on your luggage telling the TSA to stay out of the luggage and use the word bomb, you had better expect to be detained and/or arrested.

Okay, but the article says the note "was placed on top of clothes in a black gym bag" and not on the luggage. Does that make a difference to you? What if it was on the first page of a diary in the bag? Stored in a file on a floppy in the bag? In Latin?

dave, you are a boob.

You criticize the SS and you *ARE* going to get shot.

etc.

Thanks, Dave!

--sean

Ok, this is the second news post that I have been amazed at the "side" that the author has taken.

You walk into a airport or on a plane with a button saying "Suspected Terrorist" you *ARE* going to get kicked off of the plane and probably should be arrested.

You walk into an airport putting a label on your luggage telling the TSA to stay out of the luggage and use the word bomb, you had better expect to be detained and/or arrested.

Now, before you all start saying that this is all because of 9/11, this has been going on for years...

You walk into a bank before 9/11, give the teller a note telling her to give you your [expletive] money, you better have expected to be arrested then too. Or talking about hijacking in an airport...

These are things that have always been and will never change.

It wasn't that long ago, I was outside my home with a camera around my neck when a police car drove up. He stopped, and asked me if I lived around here. At first, I was a little miffed that he asked me. What business of his was it. I told him that I lived in the house I was in front of, and he was happy and drove off. I later realized that it was good that he asked because he was making sure the neighborhood was safe. Something that I really appretiate since I do own a house in the area. It's nice to know the police are on the case as it were.

So to those who think that they should be allowed to wear "Suspected Terrorist" pins and put nasty notes to the TSA on their luggage and not have something happen to them. All I can say is: I am glad that these people are on the case and taking care of business.

I can see now that this blog is not for me and I'll not be visiting it anymore. So you won't have to put up with my bad English and grammar. I suspect that if I were to stick around, that I would be seeing posts of that sort here too.

Enjoy your fantasy life and stay away from airports.

This kid is my hero.

I agree the kid got railroaded, but I think there's a school of profiling thought that says that a certain percentage of mad bombers will talk about their bombing, hence the paranoia.

Also, I can't believe someone from Israel joked about a bomb search. When my wife visited they pulled everything out and interviewed her, etc.

So, wait, you morons:

WHERE DOES THE KID EVEN JOKE ABOUT HAVING A BOMB?

He gets angry with the asshole bag checkers for going through his stuff and FLAUNTS THE FACT THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE A BOMB.

You're idiots.

--sean

Edited by author 08-02-2003 10:17 PM
"when [we] see the word `bomb,' we take it very seriously. In today's security environment, there's no room for that sort of joking.''

It wasn't a bomb threat.. It wasn't even a joking bomb threat

In fact, it was a clear comment that there was NO bomb in the bag and that the searcher was invading this kid's privacy. If the screeners couldn't see that, maybe the governement should employ screeners with IQs above 14.

Sure, some people with more delicate sensibilities may be offended by the language, but I am more offended by the fact that we put up with this.

The people (theoretically) voted this government in. It seems that most intelligent people are horrified by the blatant excuses being used to erode our privacy in the name of anti-terrorism (even if it does nothing to stop it).

When are we all going to stop accepting this? This kid seems to be an excellent example for all of us!

It's not a "no-win" situation for baggage checker s- they should care about covering OUR asses, not their own.

The kid did not make a bomb threat. He used the word "bomb". Incidentally, they were already searching the bag in question - did they find a bomb?

A professional should be worried about finding bombs - not covering his/her ass. A professional can assess risk. A trained monkey files a report whenever he sees the word "bomb".

Which would you rather have protecting you?

17 years old is kid. He is a minor. Can't buy smokes, can't vote, can't drink, can't sign up for the armed forces.

Wether or not the note was amusing or profane, neither lack of humor nor profanity should have posed much of a threat.

The kid did NOT make a sarcastic comment about the existence of a bomb in his luggage--he lefta sarcastic note in his luggage that could ONLY BE READ BY A SCREENER who could ascertain that THERE WAS NO BOMB--ONLY A NOTE.

I agree with Cory--if profane, sarcastic 17-year-olds are the greatest threat to our nation, we should have drowned Andy Hardy when we had the chance (okay, so Andy Hardy was sarcstic nor profane. whatever).

Anybody who had to cover their ass by pulling the kid for a note has a problem--there was no bomb--only a note pointing out that THERE WAS NO BOMB. Unless....maybe he had explosive ink!

Ah, those screeners. They're pretty smart.....

Edited by author 08-02-2003 09:52 PM
First, a 17-year-old is not a kid.

Second, this really has nothing to do with the TSA -- pulling this sort of shit before 9/11 would have gotten you in trouble.

Finally, an Israeli researcher visited my university before 9/11 to interview for a position. He got angry at the airport when they started going through his luggage and made a sarcastic comment about a bomb something along these lines -- police shut down the entire airport here and detained the guy for several hours.

Extreme, yes. But it's full cover-your-ass mode. What happens if they lets this go and the person does pull something? Then it's going to be all over CNN that they had this note and they let the teenager board anyway. It's a no-win situation for the baggage inspectors.

yeah, fine, but that note is not SARCASTIC - since when is "[explitive] you" or "you [explitive] sucker" a form of sarcasm? the note is foul-mouthed, but essentially totally free from all elements that might allow it to be viewed as sarcastic - specifically IRONY, SATIRE and most importatntly, HUMOR.