Today on CNN Newsroom

The latest news and information from around the world. Also connect with CNN through social media. We want to hear from you.
January 4th, 2010
07:22 AM ET

New TSA Rules

The TSA announced yesterday it will begin “enhanced” screening of passengers traveling through 14 countries that the government considers either state sponsors of terrorism, or “countries of interest.” (Read the full story here.)

Do you think these new rules will help?

Post your comments here.
Heidi will read some of them on the air during the 10a ET hour of Newsroom.

Filed under: Heidi Collins
soundoff (142 Responses)
  1. Jessica Brennan

    No! People are very uncomfortable being checked through their clothes. I think it's downright wrong! Who wants strangers to see you personal organs!!! I definitely think this rule does not some under "enhanced"!

    January 4, 2010 at 8:51 am |
  2. michael armstrong sr. TX.

    Every little bit helps but it would be more effective to profile most of the effort is lost to wild goose chases.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:07 am |
  3. jane myce

    Pure security theater, designed to make Americans feel something is being done when it isn't. The next bomb will be carried up someone's butt. Our best defense is that our enemy is as stupid and inept as we are. Quick question: is there any radiation associated with these machines?

    January 4, 2010 at 9:24 am |
  4. Dave

    Uhhh, why would a country that supports these radical people you call terrorists screen people flying out of their nation?
    That's like the Japanese checking their planes for any bombs on December 7, 1941.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:24 am |
  5. Eric

    The new rules are going to mean more standing around and more frustration for the majority of travelers... A more insightful approach to security is needed: one that does not waste the time of the average traveler.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:24 am |
  6. Larry

    Whatever it takes to protect America from the terrorists I am in favor of.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:25 am |
  7. Mike

    Rules are always good when comes to security but are we all blind to realize that we are being hostages in our own countries because of muslim extremists? They want to rule and that is what they're doing.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:25 am |
  8. Jennifer

    Unfortunately, I do not think that adding more technology to the security process will help due to the incompetent and untrained TSA agents that man the security stations. Has anyone seen the TSA agents recently?? They don't even look at the security screens when bags are going through. TSA security is a complete joke.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:25 am |
  9. Mitch

    This is a violation of privacy. I'd rather live with the risk. Every time we over-react like this, the terrorist win another battle. TSA should hire people that are more capable – that is the problem. Dont hire minimum wage, but rather higher education personnel that can think logically.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:26 am |
  10. Berrnard

    I flew into the US on the 28th from Europe.... what a joke about sitting there with nothing in my lap or hands for the last hour of the flight. No electronic items, no entertainment, no magazines or books. The crew apologized for it.We knew it wasn't their fault...... I felt like I was in grade school on a field trip........

    January 4, 2010 at 9:26 am |
  11. Phill


    Lets think about these new security screenings for a moment. I saw a few days ago a clip on CNN about the new full body scanners that TSA wants to implement into the airport security screening system. I think its ridiculous that people are complaining about privacy and things of that nature. If we had this technology before the September 11th attacks happend would anyone be complaining about it today? I think not. TSA should make this MANDATORY in ALL airports across the United States and simply put: If you don't want to have all these extra security precautions because you feel like your privacy is being invaded- then don't fly!!

    January 4, 2010 at 9:27 am |
  12. Rajiv

    This is going to be a big challenge for TSA to check for bad people on the in bound US planes. The last time we saw the 3-1-1 rule come in, it was a plan to blow up planes by using liquid and gels, and as a result, we cant carry our perfume bottles past the security. This time its the 'underwear bomber'. Are they going to make us remove our clothes now? sounds perfectly ridiculous to me.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:27 am |
  13. Bob in Texas

    Tougher regs and more misery for travelers are not the answer Heidi. A competent security system is the answer. The mindless bureaucrats drop the ball and the public and taxpayers suffer. Instead of buying more expensive machinery and imposing more restrictions on innocent travelers, lets dump the incompetents and spend the money to hire better intelligence people.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:27 am |
  14. David

    Let's not forget the guy who tried to assassinate the Saudi Prince Naif in August – he had a colon packed full of explosives. Although his attempt failed, it was a great training lesson for those who would follow in his footsteps while on planes. So if a jihadi looking guy on the plane asks you to pull his finger ... don't do it. Better screening (even if it means ethnic profiling) is a necessity with these fanatics. They want martyrdom – let's give it to them on our terms, not theirs...

    January 4, 2010 at 9:27 am |
  15. Deborah in Blue Springs, MO

    The FAA and the NTSB should not lend any weight to what the public thinks of its security measures. It is not up to civil rights and privacy rights activists to ensure the safety of air travelers. When anyone with an I.D. can buy a plane ticket, it is almost impossible to guarantee safety unless every technological measure is taken to verify safety.
    I think every person expecting to arrive alive should be willing to endure full body scans and other safety measures.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:28 am |
  16. Nicky

    I think the rules will help somewhat but they must use common sense too. There is no reason a child should have to go through a full body screening. I was flying through Albuequrque (sp?) with my two children and they pulled us out of line and made us get full body scanned. My eight year old was terrified because you have to be by yourself in the scanner. Then they swabbed her sesame street suitcase. I was so pissed off. I don't mind them pulling me out of line but children? It didn't help the situation either that we were the only black people in line. It may have helped if the scanning folks had better attitudes...especially to the kids.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:28 am |
  17. SamRam

    Without a doubt; if you are thre victim of an explosion and by some chance happen to survive with "only" injuries; when you arrive at the hospital, you wil be scanned and never know, or care, who is doing the scanning - and be most grateful you are there. I recently was diagnosed with prostate cancer and went through so many scans to make sure it hadn't spread that I do not even remember how many - I did not even consider who was "checking me out" and could care less. Let female TSA agents attend to female passenger scans; and let male TSA agents attend to male scans. If you have been to a high-school locker room; a health club locker room; a college or military locker room - you have, most likely, been more "exposed." Get a grip folks. We are talking life and death here for you as an individual; or your loved ones that are boarding planes; and we know that airplanes are the target of methodical attacks. You'll get over it! Be thankful we have the technology. Have a Safe, Secure and Happy Flight!! Happy 2010!!

    January 4, 2010 at 9:29 am |
  18. Krish

    Additional screening is always a good thing for travelers and I don't mind getting a secondary screening myself.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:29 am |
  19. eddie

    I think terror is all around us and it could hit us at any time specially at ports and where ever people gather those places should be protected iam all for and yes we should invest more in securty and training screeners more...

    January 4, 2010 at 9:30 am |
  20. michael armstrong sr. TX.

    Why not place bounty hunters in air ports to chase down radical threats.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:30 am |
  21. Karen

    It's sad that safety in travel has come to this but safe travel for all outweighs an individual's privacy concerns. From what I have read and heard, the body screening is similar to radiological procedures used to diagnose or rule out trauma, illnes, etc in healthcare and I don't hear people complaining about privacy in those instances. TSA screeners would/should be held to the same level of confidentiality as healthcare providers. I have no qualms about the TSA carrying out all measures to insure safety in air travel. This may sound trite but if someone is so concerned, he/she should choose another mode of transportation.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:31 am |
  22. MiMi Joyce, Rossford Ohio

    I'm a parent of two kids and it scares me that it had to come down to this, but I agree with it. Profiling doesn't work (color wise) because we've been attacked by every color. Terrorists come in them all. And everybody should be checked. Don't give them an opening! Scan only men, and they'll use women. Scan only adults, and god help us, they'll start using kids. I would rather be scanned then end up dead!

    January 4, 2010 at 9:31 am |
  23. Nan

    I am not comfortable with the new imaging inspections on flights. I find it personally invasive and will not fly internationally or domestically if this scan is implemented on any route I take. Why use this when dogs would be much more effective as on our borders? It is no fun to travel anymore.
    San Antonio

    January 4, 2010 at 9:31 am |
  24. Ray Johnson

    As always, Initiating new rules for travelers returning from abroad are being implemented as as stop-gap for past infractions of circumvented security. History has shown that terrorists will find new ways to circumvent security measures currently in place including the new body scan equipment being implemented. Let's face the facts – traveling abroad has and will always be a roll-of-the-dice for travelers.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:32 am |
  25. James Cosmano

    We, all Americans are in the war against terrorism. The least we can do is accept the security measures at the airports. Afterall they are only trying to save our lives.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:32 am |
  26. Gary

    It's sad to think that americans are paying the price, for allowing anyone and everyone in & out of OUR country. The new rules are
    overdue, as long as everyone is treated equally. One concern is radiation exposure, for those who are frequent flyers. I would like to
    know the amount of radiation that I'm being exposed too.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:33 am |
  27. Jennifer

    We returned home from the UK on Dec. 30th and were subject to extra security measures. The second security check included a bag search and pat down of each passenger which I understood, however, the last hour of the flight we were told we had to stay seated and all items must be stowed in the upper cabinets of the aircraft including all reading materials. Though I understand requiring us to stay in our seats, I don't understand why I couldn't read my book or a magazine. It seemed excessive and didn't give me any sense of extra security just hassle.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:34 am |
  28. Bernard Siegener

    As a flight attendant for over 13 years, I am more concerned with the safety of the aircraft we fly on. We outsource our maintenance to countries were the labor is cheap.
    We have pilots that fail checkrides and have serious accidents, such as the accident in Buffalo, NY. On many occasions, I have witnesed pilots taking shortcuts in the cockpit, and laughing about it.
    We have these isolated situations, that cause such a panic in passengers, that they will start to fly through either Canada or Mexico, to reach the USA. You never hear of terrorist attacks on Aeromexico or Air Canada.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:34 am |
  29. Jean McConnell

    I love my privacy and the fact that I live in a country where I know I have rights that protect my civil liberties. That said, I value my life more than all of that.
    During one of the stories on the new full body scanners, various peoples conerns were being voiced, but in particular a father who was concerned about how his daughter would be viewed. Trust me, I would put my child through a scanner before every flight along with everyone else if it meant we would be safe!!! Thank you

    January 4, 2010 at 9:34 am |
  30. Peter (MN)

    It unfair for TSA to target Nigerians because of Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab's terrorist act, leaving United Kingdom where Farouk was recruited. TSA can not term Nigeria a nation of interest while UK with many terrorist, even on the streets is regarded as a good nation. Nigeria is not a terrorist country. Afterall, Farouk is a prodigal son who got his terror idealism in UK and Yemen. There is no Farouk in all innocent Nigerians.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:35 am |
  31. Jena

    Members of my immediate family and I are frequent air travelers, so I support stricter regulations from TSA. I understand that some of the security measures are very cumbersome, but if we can stop even one act of terrorism, it is worth the additional steps. Let's show a little patience and let TSA do its job.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:38 am |
  32. David in WA

    Yes, the new measures make sense, more sense than those dreamed up on Christmas Day, like passengers having to remain in their seats for the last hour of the flight. if I travel through, or have passport entries from, the countries on the list I would fully expect to be questioned and subject to additional security checks. I have nothing to hide. I would be worried if I wasn't questioned; what if there is someone who fits that profile that does have something to hide.

    Profiling works. It doesn't have to be racial, religious, or gender based. It is based on behavior, or a lack of behavior and variances from "normal". It has proven very effective in other areas of law enforcement. if you look at the profiles of every person who has been involved in terrorist attacks against western countries since the mid-1990's, there are a number of common threads besides race, religion and gender. Use them as a foundation, but not as exclusions to everyone else.

    Regarding the use of body scanning technology, I say use it. If someone wants to fly, then submit to the full body scans. If they feel so strongly that it is an invasion of privacy then they can take a car, bus, train or boat. Flying somewhere is not a right, it is a privilege. Sometimes privileges come with restrictions and requirements attached.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:39 am |
  33. Ryan Rooks

    We can continue to make our lives more restricted but these new rules are just a "show" from the U.S. government to give the traveling public peace of mind. It reminds me of National Guardsmen with M-16 weapons at airport terminals after 9/11. Terrorists already have a plan long before they get to the airport. When will the fragmented U.S. intelligence agencies understand the meaning of "coordinating information"?

    January 4, 2010 at 9:40 am |
  34. SUZZIE

    No i think it is wrong, if that is the case every body travelling by air to any country should have to go through this full body screening ,and i think it is unfair to label Nigeria as a terrorism country because Umar farther had already warned the American Embassy that his son is a THREAT to Americans so why was he allowed to board the plane at Amsterdam without a passport? And we pay in cash for virtually everything in Nigeria.Including houses cars and a lot of things.So why do we have to drag Nigeria name in MUD?The Nigerian government and Nigerians all over the world condemmed Umar Abdul Farouk acts of terorism.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:41 am |
  35. Denny

    Not at all. If a man can by-pass Security points in Baltimore, then why would targeted areas aboad be any different.
    In this age of I.D. theft, Document Falsification, ect., what would this new measure do. Is U.S. Securtity is the prime directive?
    Then any and all travellers from any destination, friend or foe, should be checked before entering U.S. Soil. Otherwise it's just an illusion of security.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:41 am |
  36. Shiela

    Until the US is willing to be "politically incorrect" and profile the type of person who perpetrates these attacks. we will all be subjected to invasive body searches. This is ridiculous. Pulling people by random for this new imaging instead of looking for suspicious behavior and treating this as a real threat instead of trying not to "offend" is not taking our security seriously. I for one am sick of it, I will not be traveling under these circumstances. It is the most absurd "solution" I have heard of and frankly, blame political leaders for the stupidity.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:42 am |
  37. Al Del Gado

    Hello Heidi,
    I will strip but naked to feel safe on any flyight, and so should all especially foriners coming into the USA. We should have done more of this right after 9-11. Reaction has been too slow and these terrorist have been taken advantage of it.

    Thank you.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:44 am |
  38. Allen Owen

    Yes I do believe it will help.Any thing that will give us an edge against these killers has to help.Would you rather give up a little privacy or be dead?
    Allen Owen

    January 4, 2010 at 9:46 am |
  39. Andy Shroyer

    Yes, we need 'enhanced screenings' as long as they include "Persons of Interest" too. ( In Michigan when the police are looking for a white car that was involved in a crime they check mostly white cars!!) Also have a separate section for these checks so as not to hold up the rest of the people in line ! We definitely need those 'see through clothing' x-ray machines especially at international airports. Our government should help the airlines purchase these machines !

    January 4, 2010 at 9:49 am |
  40. Kevin

    I think its very unfortunate that Nigeria is being added to this list when it doesn't represent a significant percentage of the population there. All the other nations are Islamic countries. There are hundreds of thousands of Nigerians doing great things in the United States and all over the world and this is just something Nigerians do not subscribe to. I think that profiling SHOULD be used based on the most common similarity of ALL terrorists – Islam (they are all muslims) and there is really no point in searching high, low and in between when they can simply identify religion. It has become apparent that the United Kingdom has become a hotbed for Islamic radicalism however you don't see them being added to any list. His father informed The C.I.A at the US embassy (how many parents would do that), He schooled in the U.K and was trained in Yemen. its easy to connect the dots to Islamic radicalism and those are the people they need to go after at airports all over the world.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:51 am |
  41. SUZZIE

    UK also supposed to be listed as state sponsored of terrorism or country of interest because Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab got his terror idealism in UK.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:56 am |
  42. David

    I flew into the U.S. from Canada on January 1. Carry-on baggage was essentially prohibited and everyone subjected to enhanced screening. They were even frisking infants. The process took about 2 hours and I think every US-bound flight was delayed.

    This new requirement is unsustainable and the bad guys will no doubt come up with something new. Every time we change our lifestyle in response to these wackos, they win. The only way to defeat the terrorist mentality is to not be terrified and to carry on (think Londoners during the Blitz). As long as we let a kid with a bomb in his briefs turn our lives and commerce upside down, terrorist attempts will continue.

    January 4, 2010 at 9:56 am |
  43. Obele Tambe

    No country should be undermined when it comes to screening for terrorists, these bad guys use all routes to attain their target. So all routes leading to the U.S, should be properly protected as well. We pray our president wins this new battle again.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:11 am |
  44. Sriman

    Yes, they will help, But I don't think the 1 hour rule in the flight will help.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:31 am |
  45. Joanna

    The additional rules do not make me feel any safer. As we have seen since 9/11, the TSA is merely reactive to the most recent terror attempt. Were new rules created in a proactive manner, the number of "successful" or nearly successful terror attempts would not be what they are.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:32 am |
  46. chidinma

    i personally think is so unfair to include average nigerian will not attempt to take his or her own life.nigerians are not terrorists.i think it is just a segment of nigerians who are capable of doing that. especially where mutallab comes from.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:32 am |
  47. Martin

    New security rules are welcome, but what is being done about persons bringing explosives inboard in their rectum?

    January 4, 2010 at 10:33 am |
  48. Mike Frett

    It's a nice move to make Americans feel safer, but it's not going to stop a determined Terrorist.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:33 am |
  49. Paul Nicholson

    Use Profiling!

    Ann Coulter wrote:

    The one security precaution the government refused to consider was to require extra screening for passengers who looked like the last three-dozen terrorists to attack airplanes.

    Since Muslims took down Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, every attack on a commercial airliner has been committed by foreign-born Muslim men with the same hair color, eye color and skin color. Half of them have been named Mohammed.

    I could not agree more with her!!!!

    January 4, 2010 at 10:33 am |
  50. Mark Olacke


    Air safety is vitally important and the more forms of screening the better for all concerned. I believe that all passengers at all airports travelling from and to anywhere should go through both metal and body scans.

    Mark on Manitoulin Island, Canada

    January 4, 2010 at 10:33 am |
  51. Rob

    I do think these measures will help. If one does not like them, it's simple don't fly! Time to follow or excede Israel's policy in security, our enemies are the same.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:34 am |
  52. Charles Lawless

    Yes I do think this will help in screening passengers. Why haven't we done this before? I know why but, we should allow this now after this last incident.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:34 am |
  53. Dan

    Jess- would you rather be seen naked, or dead?
    We should have had screenings and profiling long ago.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:34 am |
  54. John

    Pat downs and full body scans aren't going to help as long as the genital area is left out. The Christmas bomber had the PETN packet right on his genitals. If he wouldn't be patted down there or if he can place a metal plate over that area in a full body scan, he will still be allowed to board an airplane and detonate. This must be addressed. Also- what about placing explosive packets in body cavities? They'll do it and we know it.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:36 am |
  55. James H.

    I think what ever steps they take should be welcomed considering it is for the good of the public. I find it ridiculous that everyone is more concerned with standing in line and how its inconvinent for them. How often does an average person fly in a years time anyway? I'm sure it's not often enough to really complain about this. I rather spend 3 hours at the airport doing the process and security checks than have someone ran another plane into a building.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:37 am |
  56. ChelleC

    My question is: WHY do we, as Americans, tend to focus on how we are going to be inconvenienced by more implemented security measures instead of feeling relieved that our SAFETY has become more important? I say do whatever it takes . . . people will complain regardless; it's part of the human condition when you live in a country where we have so much freedom and liberty readily available.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:37 am |
  57. Shalimar

    Anytime a flaw in a system or process arises, the party involved should make an effort to correct the problem. The recent changes in procedures are inconvenient for some, but we must remember that they are put into place to protect lives. TSA is just doing their job.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:38 am |
  58. Remi

    What are the health risks in using these screening machines? I wouldn't want to find out in a few years it poses a high risk for cancer.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:38 am |
  59. michael armstrong sr. TX.

    The real safety net is to profile the proublem and its not the white or black Christian's and its not the Oriental's we all know who's trying to kill us so lets cut to the chase and stop trying to make up exscuses to protect the sanctaty of one religion.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:39 am |
  60. secureworld

    I understand the rationale behind tightened security targeted at certain countries. But it makes me wonder if this will prompt the terrorists to find ways to slip in from countries that are not targeted at. Also, isn't the information of the whole counterterrorism efforts overexposed? When you are dealing with terrorists who ambush, the strategies may work better when you do not lay everything on the table. Of course, I understand disclosing the information is responsible for all travelers/passengers. But there are better ways to inform the travellers of what's going on without making the terrorists clearly aware what counterterrorism actions are implemented. This makes it much easier to achieve their goals.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:39 am |
  61. Fred Kerry Jr

    In order for this strategy to work, the subject countries and how many there are cannot be publisized. A counter strategy can always be empoyed if too much information is given. Potential terrorist can adjust their route to avoid detection.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:40 am |
  62. George

    The problem seems to be that we have adopted a reactionary style mentality. There will always be forces that oppose each other in the world; it may be the doom of mankind to be in a constant state of turmoil however it is detrimental to live in a constant state of reactionary fear.

    We will always find adversity, that is the cost of freedom, but it is not the adversity that strengthens our nation, but our manner in which our nation reacts to that adversity.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:41 am |
  63. Don Stovicek

    I'm all for enhanced screening as long as it is accompanied by profiling. I don't want to see inspectors wasting time with everyone in order to be politically correct. I want the inspectors to create a profile and check everyone who fits the profile. If an Arab-American has a problem with that then he/she should return to MidEast where U.S. and European citizens are being profiled and killed. With a minimum of time and expense, the terrorists are bankrupting this country in its attempt to safeguard the rights of everyone.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:41 am |
  64. Deepwater Don

    If travelers don't want to be screened coming to the U.S.,they should STAY HOME. If American citizens don't like screening, they should move somewhere else. The alternative to increased vigilance could,and will be another plane down over another U.S. Learn a lesson from the Israelis'

    January 4, 2010 at 10:41 am |
  65. Emmanuel

    Why is the Uk not on this list considering there have been more attempts by UK nationals than nigeria that is now being added because the american intelligence agencies blew this one?

    January 4, 2010 at 10:41 am |
  66. craig

    All precautions should be taken to assure no terror will ever happen again on flights. The full body scan is a great idea. I would like to do a scan and pat down on Heidi myself. You are so beautiful to me! LOL. You are a great reporter. Keep up the great work. Craig

    January 4, 2010 at 10:41 am |
  67. Alan

    Regarding full body scans, make the the scan optional BUT if a passenger choses not to have one, then they need to know they will be subjected to other measures including refusal to board.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:41 am |
  68. lee

    Has anyone checked the long term effect of back scatter x ray on soft tissue? I believe in high security but a head long rush into one product without a long term study strikes me as a kneejerk reaction that could have negative repercussions on innocent people down the road.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:42 am |
  69. Will

    No, I don't think it will help much. The main reason Umar probably flew from Amsterdam was to avoid that same scrutiny when traveling – he didn't fly direct from Yemen or Nigeria. We don't give these terrorists enough credit. They will probably adapt to whatever measures we take. We need to get other countries on board with whatever measures we do take that are effective to make sure they also follow a heightened sense of screening, otherwise what is the point. I think there should be an international screening law/regulation imposed. We can probably learn more about screening passengers from the Israelis. When I flew to and from Tel-Aviv in the past, I was very impressed by the security apparatus they have there for inbound/outbound passengers. It felt very safe, but the downside was that the screeners felt more like interrogators. We need to sacrifice a little if we want to preserve our safety. We cant have it all. Everything has a price.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:43 am |
  70. Nancy Noonan

    The new TSA rules are long overdue. I would rather be inconvenienced by the extra screening than boarding a plane and being subjected to an attack on the people on the plane by a derranged and religious tyrnat!

    We need to be safe and not sorry!

    January 4, 2010 at 10:46 am |
  71. Nescafe in NC

    Heidi nobody likes change! Change is hard, it's uncomfortable, but it is necessary to be safe, prosperous and healthy. We can either do what it takes to ensure no one endangers an entire aircraft like restrict inflight movies, full invasive body scans, limit access to restrooms or we can let some people who feel inconvenienced on an aircraft watch a movie, avoid full body scans because it violates their privacy or allow people to roam about the aircraft doing heaven knows what and endanger everyone else onboard the aircraft. We must agree on what is our best solution for the safety of all rather than the appeasement of some. If it is too much of an inconvenience, then stay home or drive, but don't endanger others because you feel your rights are being violated. Better alive, safe and complaining than dead and unable to complain.

    January 4, 2010 at 10:49 am |
  72. Scott C.

    Simply... Whatever it takes!

    January 4, 2010 at 10:55 am |
  73. Henry

    As it becomes more and more dificult to fly, I fly less and less!

    January 4, 2010 at 10:57 am |
  74. Gina Arcuri

    I think that people that travel to these "countries of interest" should have no problem with the enhanced security measures.
    The life they save by doing this may be their own.
    I do have a problem with the so called "profiling" since not all radical muslims may fit the "profile", wheras someone with light skin and a command of English could very well be a terrorist while being overlooked.
    Scan everyone, that would solve one problem area.

    January 4, 2010 at 11:00 am |
  75. CRR2331

    Yes I think the new rules will help General Electric or another company get contracts to get ridiculously expensive machines in those 14 countries, then in our city's airports. Don't follow the terrorists, follow the money.

    January 4, 2010 at 11:00 am |
  76. Andrew

    if the TSA are going to stereotype based on nationality, why dont they go on historical facts; majority of these radicals are in the UK, a country whose nationals don't require VISAs to travel to the US.

    January 4, 2010 at 11:01 am |
  77. Henry

    I recommend screening for every passanger not some, after all, the real terrorist will look for other ways to carry their acts. We will not win the war against terrorism if we continue with this way. I strongly oppose this development from the Obama administration/TSA. This singular act by a Nigerian which evidently was made known to the US officials by the father of the alleged terrorist, does not and should mandate the US to classify Nigeria and Nigerians as a country of 'Interest".
    The whole populace, and the entire citizens of Nigeria has spoken out to denounce this shameful act, More especially, the Nigerian Government has never been a sponsor of terrorist, and has engaged herself in many movements of liberation to the oppressed in many African peace missions.
    This is a slap in the face for the contributions of the Nigerian nation to the world. Lets' offer respect to whom it is due. Nigeria deserved not this slap, Nigerian should be screened like any other respected national.
    This is hypocrisy in the high heavens; there has been American, British, German, french citizens (just to mention but a few) who has plotted terrorist attacks in their countries and elsewhere, that did not subject the citizens of these countries to be classified as countries of 'Interest' So classifying Nigeria as a country of interest is wrong and should be denounced by the US government.

    January 4, 2010 at 11:01 am |
  78. CB

    Happy New Year, Heidi
    I have held a "border crossing card" since 1972. Travelled over the border many many times with a tractor trailer unit.
    Being a reasonable thinking Canadian and knowing about Canadian lax immigration rules; I have to say, I do not blame the US
    During our Trudeaumania time we took a allegiance away from our neighbours and sent it to others whom sadly to say are not as worthy as our major trading partners.
    God Bless you in the new year,

    January 4, 2010 at 11:01 am |
  79. Ed

    Yes because we don't need another booming

    January 4, 2010 at 11:02 am |
  80. Tyguy

    It's a short term solution(term used loosely). The more regulations we install, the less freedom we all have and the enemy wins anyway. It took a long time to get this point in our relationship with the middle east and it will take a lot longer to heal that relationship. More regulations on airlines will in no way help that healing process along.

    January 4, 2010 at 11:03 am |
  81. Dodie

    Question # 1 Why is the US experiencing more terrorists attempts than any other country in the world?

    How would you feel if you had Afghanistan and Iraqi military in your backyard, blowing up your city and killing innocent people? I am pretty sure you would be outraged!

    By spending more millions of dollars on screening devices, and whatever along with removing our freedoms, why not go to the source of this whole problem….. I would recommend we pull out of the Middle East entirely! Al Qaeda is no longer in Afghanistan; however, large oil reserves are!!! The entire world knows this except for the American people! Ann Coulter is a member of 'Project for the New American Century" If you do not know what that is, I recommend you google it and find out!

    January 4, 2010 at 11:04 am |
  82. Paul

    It's pretty simple put scanners in all airports, any airline that flies to the US must use scanners. If you don't want to go through a scanner take a boat, train, or drive!!

    January 4, 2010 at 11:04 am |
  83. Larry D

    Heidi no matter what we do here in america Terrorism is here to stay sadly to say, we don't want to embrace fear to these terrorists if they see fear more reasons to strike us. I think we have a long battle to win with terrorism will get there, but if we invade our privacy's to an extent where its hard to live then that would be overduing it, don't get me wrong as americans we all want to be safe but there will always be loop holes and ways for terrorists to get in one mistake could cost us all. I think these rules are good longs they don't discriminate us as americans and individuals.

    January 4, 2010 at 11:04 am |
  84. scott p laidlaw

    The thing that bothers me the most is that each airport in the U.S. has different screening technics. I have two metal hips and sometimes I'm patted down, and sometimes not. I wish they (TSA) would be consistent !

    January 4, 2010 at 11:05 am |
  85. James

    I think that the new TSA Security Measures is a load of crap! I mean, really, do you think that members of El Qaeda are so stupid that they'd actually walk right through TSA? I think that they work in groups, and that they would find some other way of boarding an aircraft, or just getting a bag on the plane with a bomb inside, and then that member of El Qaeda would just push a button and detonate the bomb from wherever he is!
    You have to remember! These people who belong to El Qeda are sick ,and not playing with a full deck, so they will do anything they possibly can, to accomplish their mission!

    January 4, 2010 at 11:05 am |
  86. Robert - Ohio

    I simply won't go to those locations where the threat is that great.

    I feel the enhanced security is more of a failure of the Intelligence services than successes of the terrorists. Virtually all of the terrorists since and including 9/11 were on someone's watch list. Whereas tight security is needed, more effect would be achieved is the world's security services actually shared information. I fear the victims of terrorism are more victims of political turf wars than anything else.

    January 4, 2010 at 11:05 am |
  87. Krstofer

    I'm in a wheelchair so I can't go through the detectors & thus already get the "enhanced" screening every time I fly.
    Sadly... I'm fairly certain I could sneak anything smaller than a grapefruit through security.
    I've a pocket in the front of my chair where my wallet lives- In 28 flights only 4 times has that area been checked even when the examiner(s) watch me take my wallet in & out.
    Where there is a will there is a way- Whenever we put up a wall to keep the bad-guys out it may take them a little while but they find a way around or over. It's the classic "arms race"-

    January 4, 2010 at 11:07 am |
  88. CJ

    I am not sure why we would put a few countries on the list and not others. How quickly we forget about our own home grown terrorist that the United States have convicted and produced.

    After 9/11 many travelers welcomed the added screening then how quickly we went back to complaining about long lines and delays. What will it take for the United States to be proactive vice reactive to threats against our people and nation!

    If all our agencies are all working towards a common goal to protect the nation. Why is it that they cannot work together is everything a contest on who can catch the biggest fish first?

    January 4, 2010 at 11:08 am |
  89. Jim McNaughton, Michigan

    TSA will be so busy patting down older men and women and will not look at the type that they should be checking!! My wife has both knees replaced and she is patted everywhere even thou the swiper only goes off at her knees ... furthermore has a card saying ..which they do not even look at. We have watched at airport at the type of people they always check... Crippled older people.. never the type that they should check!!

    January 4, 2010 at 11:10 am |
  90. Will

    What will be stopping a determined terrorist from traveling to the US from a country that is not a "State Sponsor" or a "Country of Interest?" If a terrorist is based in Algeria and wants to travel to the US, does this mean he/she simply has to first travel to Morocco, Mali or Mauritania and then travel to the States to avoid scrutiny? Andrew also makes an excellent point. According to news reports, wasn't Umar radicalized in the UK?

    January 4, 2010 at 11:12 am |
  91. Dawn

    Its fine that they are taking more percautions. An they have to have a basis to go on. So picking certain countries by "interest" or their connections with terrorism is fine. But they shouldn't put all their focus on just those countries. Terrorists can come from all places. Remember Oklahoma?

    January 4, 2010 at 11:14 am |
  92. Bernadette

    I am very glad to see that we have finally come to a time where we are looking at things realistically and are taking the stand that the safety of all is much more important than the privacy of one. We live in a time where we must be suspicious. It's absolutely apparent that not everyone from the known countries of terrorism are terrorists, but we don't know who is and who is not. I am a Mexican-American, I expect to be checked and rechecked at the Mexico/United States border and my father's father's father was born in this country! I think the same should be true of anyone from these countries in question.

    January 4, 2010 at 11:16 am |
  93. Andrew

    CNN please ask the hard questions.

    Why is Nigeria(60% christain, 40% muslim), a country that does not tolerate extremism and a major oil exporter to the US on that list when the UK, a hotbed for radical recruitment, is not on that list.

    I mean the fact that his muslim parents reported their son the Nigerian, UK and the US authorities and that Nigeria already put in orders for full body scanners while other countries were sitting on their hands is a testimony to its stand against radicalism.

    The US should be trying to marginilze these radical lunatics,instead their stereotyping and marginilizing nationalities and races.

    but worst of all, if they were going to do it, they should have done it quietly without announcing it.

    January 4, 2010 at 11:23 am |
  94. Cathy

    I strongly believe we should profile based on gender, age, name, countries passengers have visited or are from, Islamic religion, CIA intel, and behavior. Those folks would ge the full body screen and/or other enhanced screening. The rest of us get other types of screening. As a 60 year old woman who does not even remotely meet the profile, I resent the idea that everyone should have full body screens just to be politically correct.

    Also, how about dogs that could be tralned to sniff passengers genital area for bomb materials?

    January 4, 2010 at 11:32 am |
  95. Connor Quinn

    The thing that most Americans seem to be ignorant to, or just simply disregard is the fact that terrorists aren't stupid. No matter what security measures are implemented, terrorists are most likely going to find a way around them. If that is the case, then the new 'enhanced security' is nothing more than an invasion of privacy for innocent travelers.The TSA understands this; but they feel the need to do something so as to make Americans feel safe, when in reality, the security measures are doing nothing to improve security.

    January 4, 2010 at 11:33 am |
  96. Roberto Cardona

    Heidi, I can see giving your hair a little lift at the roots for volume, but you've gone a bit overboard. Your do is starting to look more like a helmet than anything else. Tone it down a bit.

    January 4, 2010 at 11:40 am |
  97. Dearth

    I have no issue with the rules but as a foriegner travelling within the US I find it amazing at how lax security is once past a security checkpoint. In the US after you are through Security you are not required to show your ID again even upon boarding aircraft whereas in Canada you are required to show photo ID upon boarding. Personally I would feel much safer travelling in the US if airlines were forced to check ID upon boarding but everybody knows that will never happen.

    January 4, 2010 at 11:42 am |
  98. A Jordan

    Sen Chuck Shumer [should read Schmucker] made an ignorant comment claiming all international airport securities are lax. Clearly Schmucker doesn't travel very much .

    For the past five years I was spending 200,000 travel miles a year to the U.S. and my luggage has been scanned and checked several times, all my belongings gone through in detail and left carelessly to be repacked, I go through scan after scan with each transfer, my tickets and passport is checked at least 3-5 times, and I am interrogated and humiliated as if I have committed some unknown crime. All that is missing in this process is urine and stool samples! But Schmucker thinks this is lax?
    Let me tell you what IS lax: when a terrorists own father in a crime ridden country approaches the US embassy to warn them his son is involved in radicalism and your own embassy does NOTHING about it. THAT is lax. Take responsibility for your own actions instead of portraying other nations as lax to your uninformed audience.

    Thousands of american travelers enter Europe and are never treated with the humiliation and probing into their private life the way I have gone through on every visit to this country. I contribute in business revenues and jobs to this country and don't need more insults whenever I travel here. Needless to say, I have become tired of the treatments and have reduced my visits to once a year and should perhaps consider ending business dealings here all together, and encourage others to do the same.

    You need to target security efforts to the responsible group: Muslims. Stop harassing the rest of us. As an experienced world traveler I never understood why you even give visas or citizenships to people from terrorist ridden countries anyways where even government documents can be purchased or altered with bribes.

    Add a 'country of origin' in all green cards and citizenships, so you can clearly tell if the person originates from a muslim nation or muslim faith and do the appropriate security check from then on. If you can't have the balls to ban all travels from security sensitive nations, then add wristband GPS devices on muslim travelers at airport check-ins and do full bodyscan checks, remove the device when they exit the country.
    Why should I, a Christian from a Christian neutral nation, have to go through high radiation cancer producing body scans when I don't even fit the description of a muslim or radical?

    January 4, 2010 at 11:53 am |
  99. L. McNaughton

    Response to your question will new TSA procedures make air travel safer?
    No Like now, the TSA screeners will be so distracted "over screening" older US citizens with hip and knee replacements that the terrorists will be able to get past the screening stations.

    Best Regards

    January 4, 2010 at 11:54 am |
  100. David

    The new TSA rules are too limited from problem countires. Why are they not requiring the rules in all countries that host al Queda terrorists? Why do we not ban US flights to all countires that are host nations to terrorism. Money talks and they may well listen to that penalty.Any nation involved in hosting terrorists needs to suffer finan cially. Cutting off direct US air travel is one way to do that. All citizens of those nations need to be out through the inspection ringer before they board a US bound plane; no exceptions.

    January 4, 2010 at 12:03 pm |
  101. William Courtland

    It is not like I released the movie: In the Line of Fire?

    But what is terrorists switch their methods: to move to America and build a private militia: arm themselves and cells and take schools hostage: become school bus drivers and rig the whole deal to drive into the town hall filling the undercarriage with explosives and protect themselve the whole time until they slam through the front door.

    Terrorism of the skys seems more of a plot of the fear of running out of gasoline more than truly attempting to defeat terror plots. Planes use gasoline: and when gasoline ends the airlines will be the last of the transportation systems allowed and viable to use that oil.

    We can not truly defeat the plot once begun: we must stop the motive and the reason for the plotting.

    Why does the Newscasts never account the reasoning of the terror attacks: is it because it gives them ligitimacy in the intent: yet we ignore the real reason before they rise to murderous states of mind: if something is invoking a person to commit murder: then it is likely they themselves are already being terrorized and are just responding to evironmental pressures which we overlook while proporting safety at home.

    Eventually terrorists will win: and you will stop injecting your culture into theirs because you will fear the phone when it rings: and thus all will be terrorized with fear itself.

    January 4, 2010 at 12:04 pm |
  102. Cathy

    I believe that the Islamic extremists are attacking us because they don't want anyone but those of Islamic faith to live on earth. It is very basic to me. Therefore, there is no need to try to be friends with them; we "just" need to protect ourselves from them. They are spreading in England and other European countries and I certainly hope we don't let political correctness allow us to be pushed in accomodating their religion like we have seen in England and Germany.

    January 4, 2010 at 1:23 pm |
  103. David

    Heidi, What is enhanced screening? Into how much detail and background does enhanced go?

    January 4, 2010 at 1:57 pm |
  104. SamRam

    RE: Body Scans

    Without a doubt; if you are thre victim of an explosion and by some chance happen to survive with "only" injuries; when you arrive at the hospital, you wil be scanned and never know, or care, who is doing the scanning – and be most grateful you are there. I recently was diagnosed with prostate cancer and went through so many scans to make sure it hadn't spread that I do not even remember how many – I did not even consider who was "checking me out" and could care less. Let female TSA agents attend to female passenger scans; and let male TSA agents attend to male scans. If you have been to a high-school locker room; a health club locker room; a college or military locker room – you have, most likely, been more "exposed." Get a grip folks. We are talking life and death here for you as an individual; or your loved ones that are boarding planes; and we know that airplanes are the target of methodical attacks. You'll get over it! Be thankful we have the technology. Have a Safe, Secure and Happy Flight!! Happy 2010!!

    January 4, 2010 at 5:32 pm |
  105. David

    Heidi, I notice posts on this blog talking about screening devices that see through everyone's clothes, but isn't the TSA's screening in other countries more of comparing data and info preceding someone getting on a flight or coming to the airport? I guess the TSA's not elaborating on this is because it's classified. Are we talking about checkpoint screening? Or is this turning up the heat throughout the whole intelligence, flight ticketing, checkpt process? Is it putting enough pressure on possible terrorists to satisfy security experts? Will there be enough oversight? I agree about the focus on people traveling to this country, but its hard to know how these enhanced procedures stand in comparison to what is being done now without knowing more about them.

    January 4, 2010 at 8:55 pm |
  106. Andrew

    i am very dissappointed in Obama. Allowing Nigeria, a ture friend to the USA, to be added to that list.

    Doesn't he know Nigeria is 62% christian and that even the majority of muslims in that country abhor extremism(the boys own father reported him and the US was informed months before dec 25th). if Obama was really his fathers son he would have known that.

    Instead, this "son of Africa" throws the worlds largest black nation under the bus while he leaves the UK(the shoe bombers nation) off of the list of "countries of interest".

    I guess that Obama has finally revealed himself. Just another politician. At least Bush was predictable.

    January 4, 2010 at 8:55 pm |
  107. Maurice Dargy

    I don't really care wath's beeing done to me, as long

    as I get aboard FAST and not have to walk around like

    a lost soul. By the way, the word PROFILING should be

    used very casually and become matter of fact. Not all

    muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are muslims.

    Lest's put our foot on the ground once and for all.

    January 5, 2010 at 9:34 am |
  108. J. Herrin

    I think the NSA full body screening machines could help make health-care costs more reasonable. Think about it; the priciest airline tickets are just a fraction of the cost of MRIs and CT-scans. We could just buy an airline ticket, go through the scanner, and have the TSA send the results back to our doctors rather than spending a whole bunch more money on a CT-scan!

    January 5, 2010 at 10:11 am |
  109. Annette Parker

    Now we will do full body scans. Then what? I was in one of the horrifically long screening lines at LAX the morning after Christmas. I couldn't help but wonder about a terrorist getting in that line(which had more people in it than any airliner) and just setting a bomb off right there. How can we ever protect ourselves from that?

    January 5, 2010 at 10:36 am |
  110. John Vanover

    The concern is NOT privacy or nudity. The concern is radiation. Whether it is called 'Backscatter', 'millimeter', or 'x-ray' it doesn't matter. Any exposure to the electromagnetic spectrum is radiation exposure. WHY IS THIS SAFETY ISSUE NOT BEING DISCUSSED?

    January 5, 2010 at 10:38 am |
  111. nick

    T S A

    Thousands Standing Around!!!!!

    January 5, 2010 at 10:38 am |
  112. John Vanover

    The most lucrative growth industry of our times is the “terror” business. Legions of companies lusting for government contracts are churning out police state technology at a frantic pace. In the last 17 months, TSA has received over 30,000 proposals for Big Brother technology and equipment needed to keep 280 million citizen-suspects under careful surveillance from the inside out.
    Big winners include companies whose equipment is assisting TSA’s Advanced Technology Checkpoint Project to nudify airline passengers. Digital Security Systems of Miami is promoting its ConPass Security Body Scanner, which can perform virtual cavity searches using deeply penetrating X-radiation. Company engineer Thomas Wiggins says the scanner can detect explosives hidden inside bodies or surgically implanted under flabby folds of skin. Wiggins admits that before 9-11, “The thought of using an X-ray system would have been like ordering our own death sentence.” Now Wiggins claims that the ConPass scanner “could scan a pregnant woman around 200 times without a health risk.”
    Virtually all passengers and airline crews who pass through airport screening checkpoints in the U.S. may soon be forced to submit to compulsory, whole-body X-ray exposure. Some fliers could be “fried” several times in one day. Frequent fliers could get hit hundreds of times each year. Pregnant women, infants, the chronically ill and immune suppressed would get the rays. Grateful herds of traveling livestock, prodded by TSA drovers through federally-funded “nuke chutes,” are expected to believe Hollowell’s scientifically unsupported assertion that ionizing radiation delivered via backscatter will be “about the same as sunshine.”

    January 5, 2010 at 10:47 am |
  113. WhatEver Man

    its just stupid to think we can control every airline and terminal in the world. it cant happen. All the goverment is trying to do is control Us the people with fear. the goverment is just seting us up for a NEW WORLD ORDER. all the media covering terrorist this terroist that. Its all a Sham. And i give the USA on a school house grading system only a D-, because the big wigs only think about how much they can control and how much they make. little punks.

    January 5, 2010 at 10:50 am |
  114. David Michael

    The fact that the the lone senator is holding up the TSA nomination due to ensure collective bargaining pill be prohibited is absolutely ridiculous! Collective Bargaining will not put national security in the hands of union bosses, because the language of any contract that is the result of collective bargaining can and should contain such language that clearly states the objectives of the TSA and what rights it reserves to effectively "run the business". It is collective bargain that will actually empower TSA employees and strengthen their resolve against the current threats we face by the giving them a seat that table on other issues that are less sensitive to national security. I def wouldn't want any disgruntle TSA ee's being careless, because they cant get a scheduled day off and the vacation calendar isn't full... That when the union would step in to simply remind management that the vacation calendar isn't full and inquire as to why the employee isn't being allowed to take off. I think the language in a collectively bargained contract can prohibit and ensure that there wouldn't be any union management stand offs....

    January 5, 2010 at 10:53 am |
  115. David Michael

    The fact that the the lone senator is holding up the TSA nomination due to ensure collective bargaining will be prohibited is absolutely ridiculous! Collective Bargaining will not put national security in the hands of union bosses, because the language of any contract that is the result of collective bargaining can and should contain such language that clearly states the objectives of the TSA and what rights it reserves to effectively "run the business". It is collective bargain that will actually empower TSA employees and strengthen their resolve against the current threats we face by the giving them a seat that table on other issues that are less sensitive to national security. I def wouldn't want any disgruntle TSA ee's being careless, because they cant get a scheduled day off and the vacation calendar isn't full... That when the union would step in to simply remind management that the vacation calendar isn't full and inquire as to why the employee isn't being allowed to take off. I think the language in a collectively bargained contract can prohibit and ensure that there wouldn't be any union management stand offs....

    January 5, 2010 at 10:55 am |
  116. concerned

    With all the "sleeper cells" what makes anyone think that a business traveler is not part of one. Everyone should be screened. Our puritanical thoughts should be given up to ensure we are all safe. The human form is beautiful no matter what shape we are in.

    January 5, 2010 at 12:22 pm |
  117. Stephanie Chapin

    I can not believe politicians have such a total disregard for the people they serve that they will not approve some one because they might support a union? That goes with NOT paying for health care by taxing pop, candy and chips. The lobbiests double the amount normally spent to stop this. Number one health care cost? Obesity.

    I am supporting a total boycot of voting democrat or republican

    January 5, 2010 at 12:28 pm |
  118. Sunny

    I have been listenig to to all the reports about TSA trying to implement the use of this full body scan xray. And it really sadden me that supposedly well educated people can't think past their nose. Although I can't afford to fly, I am concerned about the many that do because of business, such as reporters, company exec, etc. I wonder what would happen to these people if they are subjected to many of these full body xray scans. We all know that radiation poses a real health threat. I think the developer of this full body scan machine never took into account the health risk. Or just doesn't care as long as he or she can make a fortune from the government who will pay a fortune for these machines or the use of them. Neither did the ones who say they want to use them.

    January 5, 2010 at 1:50 pm |
  119. David

    I hope the orange groves in Florida are managing well in this cold.

    Am I seeing now with Secretary Clinton an intertwining of info exchange with State dept and field reporting?

    I can see how intelligence agents would be overwhelmed with information flooding in, confusing them.

    January 5, 2010 at 1:53 pm |
  120. ET

    1) Most TSA agents are unprofessional – real amateurs – and need better training, and/or repeat training. They can provide no security to anyone and it doesn't matter who is in charge of Homeland Security when the floor staff has such poor dedication to their work duties. I once reported a clear child abduction by a father leaving for south america to a JFK airport security. And what did they do? It doesn't matter how many decisions are made by either the president or Janet Napolitano; many TSA staff is incompetent and criminal.

    In fact, every time I leave New York for international travels it is TSA agents who STEAL any smaller electronics or valuables they can remove from my luggage! I have locks that can be unlocked by TSA agents, and they always take things and relock my luggage again after going through it. These losses have now amounted to several thousand dollars since I travel a lot. In other words, many of these TSA agents who are suppose to give security are only small time criminals. I can't fit everything in my carry-on each time to protect from these thefts. To my amazement after complaining about these thefts, the airports don't even have cameras everywhere to keep a track of the activities of their own staff!

    2) The problem with full body scans is not that I am not willing to be 'nude' to a TSA agent for national security. The problems are that the radiations are dangerous and cancer producing. There has already been research confirming that X-ray radiation is too risky for mass screening in a medical environment, then how would mass screening in an airport be any different? Its not going to give lesser risks at all. Of course the manufacturer wants his profits and will argue that these scans produce no risks whatsoever yet the medical community can't even invent safe scanning devices. He may even provide his own amazing "research evidence", paid for to represent his own incentives. Fact is I am NOT willing to be subject to this radiation the 10-20 times a year that I travel. Should I risk my health in a nation that don't even have fully covered socialized medicine simply because the government does not want to focus to target their security measures to the responsible target: Muslims?

    Profiling is therefore 100% necessary.

    January 5, 2010 at 2:25 pm |
  121. ET

    I once had a mexican TSA agent in LAX throw stones at me and threaten to fabricate some "accusation" to have me arrested!

    And the reason for his outburst? I was rushing to my check-in after being stuck in traffic and arriving late. Taking an elevator with a TSA agent to what I was hoping was the departure level I asked the TSA agent what floor it was on. He wouldn't respond. I then arrived on the wrong floor and said, "Since you know the airport you could have been more helpful". This was all it took for me to be thrown stones at and be threatened!
    And THIS is what I am suppose to rely my security on??? NO WAY!

    January 5, 2010 at 2:40 pm |
  122. ET

    Bernard Siegener has such a valid point with his experience as a flight attendant: "We outsource our maintenance to countries were the labor is cheap."

    We CANNOT outsource ANY aspect of either labor, manufacturing or security to any foreign country! Especially not third world countries. This is simply absurd! Its like giving guns to terrorists, hiring them to guard your safety.... Absolutely insane.

    January 5, 2010 at 2:46 pm |
  123. Khan

    Long time ago, there was a very incompetent king and the country was suffering badly under his poor governance. When people started complaining King’s aides (ministers) advised him to start beating people every day. So the King ordered to start giving one lash per person every morning.

    Soon, the mismanagement and corruption increases, and people again start complaining (even though they were beaten every day). Now the King’s aides advised him to double the beating. Hence the King ordered to give two lash per person every morning.

    Eventually, one day , hundreds and thousands of citizens gathered outside the King’s Palace. They were all chanting, and protesting loudly. King and his aides thought they’re facing a civilian rebellion and revolt. King came out from his Palace to talk to people and to listen to their complains and to negotiate a middle ground for peace.

    To his surprise, the people said “Oh King, Our Lord – We’re blessed and fortunate to have a ruler like you, but we are unhappy with your men and officers. We have to stand and wait in very long lines every morning to receive two lashes and hence we arrive late to our work and get late for everyday chores. Thus, we request you to increase the number of men and the number of lanes to expedite the process of lashing every morning.”

    January 5, 2010 at 4:59 pm |

    with due respect, it is unfair to blacklist Nigeria due to the sin of ONE man.On d other hand,to re-organized your Security is good BUT "... safety is of d LORD"-Prov.21:31
    [Except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain-Ps127:1]That disaster was averted as a result of few faithfuls and God-fearing Christians that are secretly interceeding[praying] for their fatherland-USA!!!

    January 6, 2010 at 5:14 am |
  125. melvin davis

    for those who are on the watch list, are voice and photo id being used

    January 6, 2010 at 9:06 am |
  126. Gus

    Re: Newark Airport Security
    If the TSA and Port Authority can't figure out who is responsible for security cameras and recording just wait until the TSA is unionized! Mistake!!

    January 6, 2010 at 9:34 am |
  127. David

    Am I seeing now with Secretary Clinton an intertwining of info exchange with State dept and field reporting?

    Anyone can answer that?

    January 6, 2010 at 1:42 pm |
  128. SamRam

    Most of the automoibile dealerships in this day and age have a fingerprint scanner every time you check out a key for a vehicle. Nobody complains because we realize the need for it; and additionally, do not want to get blamed for a key - or vehicle - that turns up missing. We have draft registration laws that only include males; big error. We should all register and have our fingerprints recorded. In some states, they require a fingerprint for your driver's license - or has our "Supreme Court" prohibited that. Why not require a "Flyer's License" that requires a fingerprint? All of our men and women who serve to protect us - and our way of life - have been fingerprinted. Why not the people who board planes with us and our loved ones; unless y'all have a better way to identify culprits that may blow us to bits.

    January 6, 2010 at 3:56 pm |
  129. A. Smith, Oregon

    CNN Newsroom, show us the video from the Amsterdam airport security cameras that followed the Nigerian Muslim bomber thru the security gates and onto his Detroit bound flight. Two creditable eyewitness's have both stated a middle aged man spoke for the Nigerian Muslim bomber and helped him pass the security screening and gates to get him onto his flight to Detroit. Let the CNN Viewers see that video and make up their own minds.

    Security analysts are now openly questioning if the CIA deliberately aided or refused to pass on the information they knew about the Nigerian Muslim bomber to the TSA authority's who would have immediately blocked the bomber from boarding his Detroit bound flight.

    Are some of the CIA members acting out of loyalty to former vice-president Dick Cheney? Dick Cheney has repeatedly criticized President Obama's roll back on both wars and shutting down all of the CIA secret prisons around the world including that at Gitmo. All of the former CIA directors WARNED President Obama that there would be consequences if he proceeded.

    Is the ability of the Nigerian Muslim bomber to get onto his International Flight the result of a power vacuum within the CIA agency between those still loyal to Dick Cheney and want President Obama to fail? Is this precisely what the former CIA directors warned President Obama about?

    It is one thing for Rush Limbaugh to wish and hope for President Obama to fail, but yet another for the CIA agency to wish and act in such a similar manner.

    January 6, 2010 at 4:29 pm |
  130. John

    Some people complain that TSA shouldn't hire Minimum Wage people. Here is a better idea fire Senator Stupid Jim from South Carolina and the TSA just pays more then MInimum Wage and the Wage should be 14.00 per hour. Besides the first commentor should just shut up because that person hasn't heard of Body Scanners.

    January 6, 2010 at 11:09 pm |
  131. John

    I hope the Middle aged man got fired from his job in Airport Security in Amsterdam and got arrested for aiding terrorists.

    January 7, 2010 at 12:55 pm |
  132. lucian Duffield

    why not get rid of the TSA and train a different set of people properly and hired by the government so you can feel confident about your security like we feel about our armed forces. Most other countries do not sub-contract companies for security in their airport they tend to use either elite police or armed forces.

    January 7, 2010 at 3:24 pm |
  133. ken

    I'm getting tired of the profiling issue. It is a fact that almost all of the bombers are muslims. Sure, most muslims aren't terrorists but how is the general public to know who is innocent and who is not.
    I think it should be that all muslims who fly should understand that and submit to these measures as their "contribution" to the war on terror. It is their people who are causing worldwide hardships and death and we have to be able to seperate the wheat from the chaff somehow. Their "contribution" would be an altruistic solution to the muslim problem.
    I also think the use of bomb sniffing dogs should be used. From what I understand they are better at this than any machine, and cheaper.

    January 8, 2010 at 10:12 am |
  134. Jeff

    I wonder how president Obama's acceptance of responsibility for what happened Xmas day is making a difference? I flew from Hartford CT to Detroit the day before yesterday and accidentally left a switchblade in my carry on. I discovered it when I unpacked in Detroit. The knife was complety undetected by TSA screening in Hartford!

    January 8, 2010 at 10:32 am |
  135. Cathy

    Everyone should NOT be screened in the full body machine. That is a waste of time and actually a dumb idea. When a white, middle aged female blows up a plane, then I will agree to being screened in that invasive manner. Until then, I will take off my shoes (also dumb) and get wanded or whatever. Profile!

    January 8, 2010 at 11:02 am |
  136. sue scott

    no matter what the rules are, TSA needs to hire people with with integrity...or at least common-sense,,,?where are they finding these employees for such an important job?

    January 8, 2010 at 11:15 am |
  137. sue scott

    After reading many comments; perhaps people need to THINK more before they make their comment:
    it's better to be uncomfortalbe when it means safety; communication skills alleviate many fears; children react to their parental views so parents need to think safety first for that child...again, keep us all safer.
    Perhaps male/female lines and respective screeners; passing out a safety booklet (a correct one for the young) ...ask Deasn Kamen for more ideas...let's all stay safe and still not let terrorists put fear in us whe faith in our system sould keep us positive and moving forward.

    January 8, 2010 at 11:32 am |
  138. John

    You know lets just get rid of the Stupid TSA and go back to private Security firms. Of Course the politicans in Washington would go and be bratts if we got rid of the TSA and go back to Private Security.

    January 8, 2010 at 12:58 pm |
  139. John

    Let me guess why Cuba was added was it those stupid exiles that America loves and hates from Cuba and the pro Cuban exile and pro British media in America and their brain washing money paid off the state department to add Cuba to the list. Why not add Britain to the TSA list of 14 countries. Cuba has never trained terrorists to attack America. America has been the one to attack Cuba terrorist style including the airlines bombing.

    January 9, 2010 at 8:08 pm |
  140. Perry BArker

    I'd like to feel safe when I travel. If you are worried about privacy just stay home. I don't care if everyone has to get naked and line dance if it means that I'm safe. As for a watch list. IF someone is on a watch list to me it means they should have to stand back and WATCH the plane leave without them.

    January 11, 2010 at 9:43 am |
  141. rgmich

    Solution suggestion: Require TSA "body" screeners be RN's – not fresh out of school, but experienced "seen it all" nurses. Who would object?

    January 11, 2010 at 9:44 am |
  142. Carl Cripe

    To full body scan or not? To get blown up or not? Me I go with full body scan I like all my body parts together not blown all to hell... Who cares what u look like as long as you are safe on a plane....and if you don't want to fly, you can drive or walk because then your rights are intact or are they?

    January 11, 2010 at 10:29 am |