Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Maureen Dowd's "Stripped of Dignity": Another Hatchet Job

After reading Maureen Dowd's latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Stripped of Dignity" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/20/opinion/20dowd.html?hp), I could barely contain my rage at the T.S.A., which, according to the columnist, had given a 6-year-old girl a "deep probe":

"Consternation crackled again last week when a Kentucky couple posted video of their 6-year-old daughter being given the deep probe by a female T.S.A. agent in New Orleans."

I was convinced by Dowd's description that the T.S.A. had ruthlessly examined the little girl's body cavities, but the YouTube video that I subsequently watched, showed the child being given a pat-down. Although I am certain that the T.S.A. check disturbed the parents and the child, and we can also debate the appropriateness of subjecting children, particularly 6-year-olds, to such examinations, this was not a "deep probe".

In an AP article entitled "Video of TSA frisking 6-year-old sparks anger", appearing in Yahoo News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110413/ap_on_re_us/us_tsa_child_frisked), it is reported:

"Jennifer Mitchell, a child safety advocate who watched the video, said the pat-down seemed 'a little invasive.'

'This is a hard issue because we have national security on one hand... and children's safety on the other,' said Mitchell, co-president of Child Lures Prevention, a Shelburne, Vt., organization that works to prevent crimes against children.

Mitchell recommended that parents tell children before going to the airport that they may get a pat-down. But children should be told 'the only reason it would be allowed is the parents are right there, the clothes are not being removed, the parents are watching to make sure it's done ok,' Mitchell said."

There is an enormous difference between "a little invasive" and a "deep probe".

The AP story on Yahoo News story goes on to say:

"Martin Macpherson, the director of the London-based Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, said he is not aware of instances when terrorists have used children as young as six in an attack."

Regrettably, however, children, the mentally infirm and crippled persons are used by terror organizations to perpetrate their ghoulish acts (see, for example: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2003/1/The+Exploitation+of+Children+for+Terrorist+Purpose.htm).

In a perfect world without terror attacks, children would never have to be subjected to such examinations, and perhaps in this instance, discretion should have been exercised and the child excused from the pat-down. However, the world's terror organizations are also constantly probing the soft underbelly of Western sensitivities.

The Israeli system of airport security, premised upon profiling, intelligence and highly motivated young employees, many of them college students, works well. However, if mimicked in the U.S., it could well give rise to charges of discrimination.

Bottom line: We live in an ever more challenging world with no easy answers. I can appreciate the sensitivities of this 6-year-old and her parents, yet if Ms. Dowd were to have personally witnessed a suicide bombing, when bloodied limbs and torn clothing are scattered to the wind, perhaps she could better understand the true meaning of being stripped of one's dignity.

4 comments:

  1. I've witnessed 80 year old+ grandmas being given the patdown.
    Regarding children experiencing the same,I think them more adaptable than given credit.It's the overreaction of the parents that often creates the emotional outcome and potential damage.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Last time in Boston I had to go through the body scan. Ok. The machine "found something" in two places on my upper body. The security told me that they will pat down my upper body. Yet the security woman "volunteered" to go much lower and deeper. When she touched me, I yelled at the top of my lungs. The officer came in. Other security personel there confirmed the story of my rapist that she touched my upper body only. It was Abu Ghraib, I was absolutely defenseless, and the security was absolutely invincible.
    Are you convinced that we all have to live in Abu Ghraib? This is price of our "safety" you accept? I would rather stand chance of being blown to pieces than being raped by these women.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I thought with Obama in office we would get past "the silly season" -- the season of common nonsense-- at airport check-ins. They SHOULD be using racial and behavioral profiling. My 92 year old mother-in-law was practically strip searched en route to my son's wedding. Until we can leave our shoes on, this country is nuts and wasting money on unnecessary procedures and personnel.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Why would the Isreally very standardized and successful method of asking questions be considered ineffective in the USA by simply dismissing it as having possibly legal lawsuits? What? The Isreal airport security works very well. Why couldn't we do that in the USA?

    Could it be because the money fills the pockets of contracters for scanning machines and low paid security guards by agency? Instead of a well trained force like air traffic controlers or nurses? I am sick that we would rather publically fondle children than create a more successful way of security with trained questioners?

    So we target children instead of questioning more likely people who are involved in terrorist activity? To be honest to watch those kids get publically fondled and forcing the parents and child to go through this is inhumane. When there are better solutions available.

    A trained force like in Isreal works well and is highly effective. And has worked well for the last 50 years in Isreal. Instead of giving huge contracts for scanning machines and low paid agency security guards we would be wise to invest in training by Isrealy security forces and well trained professionals at airport security checkpoints like in Isreal.

    ReplyDelete