NY Times - Meet Mikey, 8: U.S. Has Him on Watch List

[PiLfan]

Which apparently, 80% of this board would be cool with so kids don't have to be searched. Or grandmas. Or disabled. Or mentally handicapped.

It's no so much that but the shortcomings of the TSA "lists" that give a name or alias and apparently nothing else, and if someone's name matches it, they get scrutinized up the ying yang no matter what. Obviously the real Mikey Hicks or whatever the TSA has been interested in for some time now isn't some 8-yr old cub scout. As someone mentioned earlier, is it really that hard to include a couple of other descriptors/identifiers (age being an obvious one) that can help eliminate some folks from being scrutinized like this every time they check-in just for having the same name? It would not just reduce the embarrasment and inconviences like what this article talks about, but could also free up security personnel and resources to be more efficient and better increase safety. That's what some of us are asking...not giving a blanket free pass to all kids, grandmas, etc, etc.

[Popeman38]

It's no so much that but the shortcomings of the TSA "lists" that give a name or alias and apparently nothing else, and if someone's name matches it, they get scrutinized up the ying yang no matter what. Obviously the real Mikey Hicks or whatever the TSA has been interested in for some time now isn't some 8-yr old cub scout. As someone mentioned earlier, is it really that hard to include a couple of other descriptors/identifiers (age being an obvious one) that can help eliminate some folks from being scrutinized like this every time they check-in just for having the same name? It would not just reduce the embarrasment and inconviences like what this article talks about, but could also free up security personnel and resources to be more efficient and better increase safety. That's what some of us are asking...not giving a blanket free pass to all kids, grandmas, etc, etc.

That, would take longer than taking this kid aside and searching. These TSA agents that do security at checkpoints are scanning thousands of names on boarding passes per day. Now, imagine having to scan not just name, but identifiable marks, age, race..... And of course, no terror/criminal suspect would ever alter their appearance to slip through security.

Look, as much as I agree that obviously this kid is not a threat, the search that he goes through takes an extra 5 min. Is it going to really impact this kids or his families life? No. And notice the article says he was patted down at 2 years old, and he cried. A 2 year old also cries when he gets a vaccination, is reprimanded by his parents, or has his toy taken away. Should we stop all that too? I mean, 2 year olds never cry unless something heinous has been done to them. :doh:

[PiLfan]

That, would take longer than taking this kid aside and searching. These TSA agents that do security at checkpoints are scanning thousands of names on boarding passes per day. Now, imagine having to scan not just name, but identifiable marks, age, race..... And of course, no terror/criminal suspect would ever alter their appearance to slip through security.

Look, as much as I agree that obviously this kid is not a threat, the search that he goes through takes an extra 5 min. Is it going to really impact this kids or his families life? No. And notice the article says he was patted down at 2 years old, and he cried. A 2 year old also cries when he gets a vaccination, is reprimanded by his parents, or has his toy taken away. Should we stop all that too? I mean, 2 year olds never cry unless something heinous has been done to them. :doh:

I know that terror suspects would obvioulsy attempt to alter their appearance, but it would be pretty hard for a 30+ year old scumbag to pass himself off as a 2 year old infant, ya think? Those type of identifiers are pretty hard to fake, and it wouldn't be that difficult to incoroporate (one would think).

But i see your point as well...bottom line is, **** all terrorists...thanks to them, flying has long since gone from a once pleasant experience to a rung or two below a trip to the dentist for a root canal in terms of enjoyability.

[Larry]

I know that terror suspects would obvioulsy attempt to alter their appearance, but it would be pretty hard for a 30+ year old scumbag to pass himself off as a 2 year old infant, ya think?

How hard would it be for them to put their explosives in Mikey's crotch, instead of their own?

[PiLfan]

How hard would it be for them to put their explosives in Mikey's crotch, instead of their own?

Again missing the point.

-- The 2yr old's name is on the watch list.

-- Neither of his parents are.

-- The watch list says the alleged terrorist scumbag should also be in his 30s.

-- Ergo, you can probably exclude the 2yr old infant from a whole bunch of additional, unnecessary screening because (1) he isn't in his 30s, and (2) the alleged scumbag isn't one of his parents either, which would pretty much eliminate the possibility of Mikey having a bomb in his diaper that's made up of anything other than last night's sweet potates and jar of Gerber.

[Larry]

Again missing the point.

-- The 2yr old's name is on the watch list.

-- Neither of his parents are.

-- The watch list says the alleged terrorist scumbag should also be in his 30s.

-- Ergo, you can probably exclude the 2yr old infant from a whole bunch of additional, unnecessary screening because (1) he isn't in his 30s, and (2) the alleged scumbag isn't one of his parents either, which would pretty much eliminate the possibility of Mikey having a bomb in his diaper that's made up of anything other than last night's sweet potates and jar of Gerber.

Or,

3) The parents are traveling on fake documents, because they're terrorists, but they didn't know security had been alerted to Mikey.

See, that's the problem with over-relying on lists. The lists can be wrong.

[Mickalino]

2-year-olds should be frisked, because they will be the next instrument of terrorists. They will hide their explosives in the diapers of an innocent, unassuming toddler of theirs.

Terrorists are evolving. They tried it as a shoe-bomber. Then, the Panty-Bomber. And next, it will be the Toddler-Bomber. You heard it here, first.

[GhostofSparta]

2-year-olds should be frisked, because they will be the next instrument of terrorists. They will hide their explosives in the diapers of an innocent, unassuming toddler of theirs.

Terrorists are evolving. They tried it as a shoe-bomber. Then, the Panty-Bomber. And next, it will be the Toddler-Bomber. You heard it here, first.

Wasn't that one of the tactics the Viet Cong used back in the Vietnam War, strapping bombs to kids? Now, I know we don't hear about every thwarted terrorist attempt, but I'd be remakably surprised if al Queda or some similar group hasn't already tried this at least once. But as I said, I have no way to prove it one way or the other.

[Titaw]

Im on the damned no fly list.

Kiddo, I feel your pain.

I highly doubt that you, yourself are on the no fly list. Your name may be the same as a person on the no fly list, but YOU are not on the no fly list. You may have to go through additional screening and it may take you a little longer but, the people that are actually on the no fly list are extremely bad people that NEED to be kept off of planes.

[Titaw]

Again missing the point.

-- The 2yr old's name is on the watch list.

-- Neither of his parents are.

-- The watch list says the alleged terrorist scumbag should also be in his 30s.

-- Ergo, you can probably exclude the 2yr old infant from a whole bunch of additional, unnecessary screening because (1) he isn't in his 30s, and (2) the alleged scumbag isn't one of his parents either, which would pretty much eliminate the possibility of Mikey having a bomb in his diaper that's made up of anything other than last night's sweet potates and jar of Gerber.

Nope you sir missed the point

-- Name of 2 year old IS on watch list (exact match)

-- Neither of parents are watch listed (inconsequential)

-- Terroist in 30s

-- Like I sadi it is to the descretion of thw screener or desk op. If the Mom was acting like a total C when the desk op told her there seems to be an issue. I would see the extra sceening happening because the mom treated the people that were trying to get her baby on the plane like crap. If the mother were cooperative and compliant the first time this happened, her son would not have been screened.

The fact of the matter is simple it is rediculously difficult for TSA to keep an indivdual off of a flight. They have to be able to make a 100% match , if they can't the individual gets the royal treatment and possibly has an escort.

[Enzo]

People are idiots.

Now I've got a questions.

The terrorist believe that they are going to get 72 virgins, when they kill themselves & others, when they go to heaven. So then why would they stick explosives down their pants & blow off their penis? If they even had one in the first place.