"Peter Duniho" wrote in
:

"Judah" wrote in message
. ..
The idea that an 11 month old baby is a terrorist is ludicrous, for
sure.

But the woman says, "It was bizarre," Sanden said. "I was hugely
pregnant, and I was like, 'We look really threatening.'"

A pregnant woman can be carrying a bomb just like anyone else, even
if she doesn't know about it...

If the pregnant woman's name was the one on the "watch list", then
impeding their progress might have been warranted.

But when the name on the list matches that of an infant, it should be
obvious to even the dumbest government employee that the name on the
list refers to someone OTHER than that infant.

The name could have been acquired through the vicious beating of some
captured terrorist suspect who caved in during the interrogation. The plan
could have been to smuggle a bomb on a plane in the daiper of an infant.
The name could absolutely have referred to an infant. The mission could
have even gone by the name of the infant, and surveillance of the infant
and anyone who had recently come in contact with the infant would surely be
appropriate.

Frankly, of the many problems with this whole "watch list" thing, one
is that the government does not explain how a person's name winds up
on the list in the first place. Do they just pick names that sound
like something a terrorist has? Or does each name on the list
correspond to a real person of whom the government already has
suspicions?

The former would be absurd (though certainly not outside the realm of
possibility in today's environment). But if the latter, the list
should also include an age, and possibly other descriptive elements
(height comes to mind). A person with the same name, but with
*obviously* different characteristic otherwise should be allowed to
pass as though their name were not on the list at all.

The problem is not that they searched an infant based on a list of names.
The problem is that they waited until the infant came to the metal detector
to start their surveillance, and they told the people the criteria that was
used to select them. The whole surveillance thing is useless when you do it
half-assed and announce to the world which half of your ass your using.

I think it's great, actually, that the TSA is stopping infants, and
even children, when their names are on the list. Idiotic behavior
like this is one of the best ways we have to getting the American
public to understand what a fiasco they have allowed to occur, and
getting it fixed.

THIS I COMPLTELY agree with.