 |  | top stories | | 1 new story
no new comments | | etcetera | 2 new stories
32 new comments | | filmtv | 3 new stories
48 new comments | | media | 1 new story
44 new comments | | politics | 3 new stories
125 new comments | | scitech | 1 new story
9 new comments | | work | 2 new stories
28 new comments | |
| | | | | Airport Security Forces Mom To Drink Breast Milk | | | | | found on Ananova
written by chlim01, edited by Tim (Plastic) [ read unedited ]
posted Thu 8 Aug 8:23am | | | | |
 |
"It was very uncomfortable and very embarrassing and very disgusting. I'm all for security, but that was a little much."
chlim01 writes "A Long Island mom, 40, has been traumatised at JFK Airport by an over-zealous airport security guard. Upon discovering 3 feeding bottles containing breast milk in her bag, he forced her to drink from each of them to prove the liquid wasn't something deadly. Not surprisingly, she's planning to sue the airport, especially since what the guard did was not a required security procedure."
| |
[ more plastic... ] |
| | | | | | | 1. Huh?
| | | | by Saige |  | | | at Thu 8 Aug 8:40am | score of 2 compelling | | | | | | |
When the guard found the bottles, she claims: "I said, 'That's the milk for the baby'. And he said, 'You have to drink it'. And I said, 'I can't, it's breast milk'. He said, 'You have to drink it, or you can't get on the plane'."
Now, can someone explain to me why she said "I can't" when asked to drink it? Is there a law against it? Would it instantly kill her? And why would she even have the attitude that something she could give to her baby, she couldn't ingest herself?
Yes, it was totally wrong for the drunk-on-his-authority guard to require she do such a thing. But I can't, for the life of me, figure out why she reacted like she was being required to drink cyanide or something like that. She feeds it to her baby, doesn't that imply that it's not going to hurt her? Heck, I was under the impression that many mothers when feeding their baby pumped breast milk from the bottle would put a little on their arm and taste it to confirm the temperature.
I mean, crap, it's surely better for the human body than milk from another animal entirely, since that milk is not meant to nourish humans.
--'ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge' - Darwin
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 5. Re: Huh?
| | | | by JET24 |  | | | at Thu 8 Aug 8:53am | score of 5 astute | | in reply to comment 1 | | | | | |
Not to be disgusting, but a lot of guys expect their wives and girlfriends to ingest a certain bodily fluid that most of them would absolutely refuse to consume themselves, even though it 'came' from their own bodies.
Religion don't mean a thing; it's just another way to be right. - Spoon
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 7. Re: Huh?
| | | | by coquito |  | | | at Thu 8 Aug 9:03am | score of 3.5 astute | | in reply to comment 1 | | | | | |
i don't think it's so weird. you gotta remember we live in a pretty antiseptic society, one that has all kinds of issues with bodies and bodily fluids. just because she feeds it to her baby doesn't mean she wants to drink it herself (i can't remember drinking breast milk, but it sure isn't Vitamin D Homogenized...). ever smelled baby formula? i think it's about the grossest smell on earth, but my little sister drank it. (and i checked the temp on my wrist, no tasting.) i probably drank it too, as a baby. or think about saliva, you have it in your mouth all day, but you probably wouldn't want to drink a glass of your own spit. hell, lots of adults can't even deal with seeing a woman breastfeed, you think they'd be cool with drinking breastmilk? i'm sure some women find the simple fact of lactating to be gross, natural though it may be. it's just something our society doesn't deal with. it might seem irrational, but it's just part of the way people are.
and besides, she may have said she can't, but being caught of guard like that, i'm sure people say all kinds of things. she did eventually drink it, so i don't think her view of it was akin to cyanide. she shouldn't have been forced to drink it regardless, and while i may not agree with the woman's outlook completely (whatever it may be) i can understand why she didn't want to take a swig.
In Hindu, you have not one God, but many, many, many, many, many gods -- learned Hindu scholar
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 9. Re: Huh?
| | | | by Saige |  | | | at Thu 8 Aug 9:15am | score of 1 irrelevant | | in reply to comment 7 | | | | | |
i'm sure some women find the simple fact of lactating to be gross, natural though it may be. it's just something our society doesn't deal with. it might seem irrational, but it's just part of the way people are.
In fact, you're very right - large numbers of women in the US for some idiotic reason have come to think of breastfeeding as "disgusting", "revolting", what have you. So, instead of using a free, well-balanced, very healthy source of food for their child, they'd rather pay money to buy something that's a poor imitation and causes infants to be overweight. It's like, what, do they think they have breasts solely to look good?
I'm convinced that as soon as it is possible, some women are going to use artificial wombs to gestate their child, so they don't have to do something disgusting like pregnancy, and before long, nobody will want to have a "natural" pregnancy. It may seem far-fetched - after all, why would women give up something like that, why spend money to do something they could do for free? The example above shows they would.
--'ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge' - Darwin
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 50. Re: Huh?
| | | | by Decadent Sundae | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 3:41pm | score of 2 astute | | in reply to comment 9 | | | | | |
Why give up something like that... let me see. Labor pains, stretch marks, gestational diabetes, preclampsyia, swollen ankles, back aches, post-partum depression, hormonal imbalances, vaginal tearing, having strangers on the street address your stomach and make goofy noises... Petty annoyances, mortal dangers, really disgusting fluids being forced from your body along with an object the size of a bowling ball -- Yeah, given the chance, I'd pass on that and go for the test tube option.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 18. Re: Huh?
| | | | by jasonm1 | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 10:09am | score of 2 interesting | | in reply to comment 1 | | | | | |
Asking someone to drink breast milk is akin to asking someone to eat dog food. Ingesting neither will hurt you, but it's a bit disgusting. The adult human mouth probably won't find breast milk that tasty. If she had been asked to eat dog food, would you have reacted the same way?
"Always be willing to speak your mind and a base man will avoid you" -- William Blake
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 33. Re: Huh?
| | | | by philipmarlowe | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 2:27pm | score of 1.5 informative | | in reply to comment 18 | | | | | |
When my wife was breastfeeding, she would pump milk and leave it for the baby when she went to work. I usually had to taste it to make sure that it was the right temp. It was not discusting at all. Actually, it tasted pretty good, kinda mildly sweet. Actually, it's much less disgusting than cow's milk.
this is not a sig
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 38. Re: Huh?
| | | | by Anonymous Idiot |  | | | at Thu 8 Aug 2:38pm | score of 0.5 brilliant | | in reply to comment 18 | | | | | |
Human breast milk has a slightly sweet flavor that I personally find appealing. Certainly added an interesting twist to our sex life when my wife was breastfeeding. Oh, sorry - you probably find sex disgusting, too...
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 27. Re: Huh?
| | | | by mihcal | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 11:09am | score of 5 informative | | in reply to comment 1 | | | | | |
Now, can someone explain to me why she said "I can't" when asked to drink it?
Breast milk is sterile when expelled. It can last up to 10 hours at room temperature, as long as it remains untouched. However, once someone (mother or baby) takes a sip from it, it becomes contaminated with saliva and that starts the clock ticking -- after an hour or so, you need to throw it out.
It is quite likely that Ms. McGarry had been away from her baby, and pumped the milk with the intention of storing it for feeding at a later time. Pumping milk is a PITB, and I can understand Ms. McGarry's reluctance to spoil all three bottles.
It doesn't take all kinds. We just have all kinds.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 44. Re: Huh?
| | | | by Saige | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 2:53pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 27 | | | | | |
Thank you very much for that info, as I was unaware. That does add an interesting perspective, since it was essentially forcing the infant, after the little bit of time that the milk was still acceptable, to go hungry during the flight. I'm sure the other passengers would appreciate the guard making sure that the lactating mother wasn't planning on putting together a molotov milkshake on the plane when they had to endure hours of a screaming infant.
--'ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge' - Darwin
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 59. Re: Huh?
| | | | by Velvet Iguana | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 7:51pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 27 | | | | | |
Breast milk is sterile when expelled. It can last up to 10 hours at room temperature, as long as it remains untouched.
This is a very informative comment because it also explains why she offered put some of the milk on her arm and lick it instead of drinking straight from the bottle, a suggestion which I could not understand previously.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 85. Re: Huh?
| | | | by EamPeB | | | | at Sun 11 Aug 4:20am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 27 | | | | | |
This was going to be just my point, if I had more points you'd o up one, and I was all set to downgrade the moron with the 'other liquids' stuff. Expressing milk is for many women the one part of breastfeeding they hate, it can make them feel almost bovine, so for some moron to ask them to contaminate something they just spent three hours collecting, presumably to avoid offending the sensibilities of those on the flight, I can understand that she'd be rightly upset.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 28. Very good reason not to do this
| | | | by ksu93 | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 11:33am | score of 2 informative | | in reply to comment 1 | | | | | |
Now, can someone explain to me why she said "I can't" when asked to drink it? Is there a law against it? Would it instantly kill her? And why would she even have the attitude that something she could give to her baby, she couldn't ingest herself?
Acutally, yes, I can explain. My son currently breastfeeds, so I've had to learn all about this stuff. Once someone sips from a bottle of milk, the rest of the milk must be consumed within a very short period of time or there is a serious risk of contamination. Think of it like this: Would you like it if everyone in your house drank straight from the milk jug? It's precisely the same thing here, with the added danger that the milk probably won't be refridgerated for an extended period of time.
"War is God's way of teaching Americans geography." -Ambrose Bierce
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 37. Re: Huh?
| | | | by settonull | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 2:37pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 1 | | | | | |
can someone explain to me why she said "I can't" when asked to drink it?
Now since she did go on and drink it this argument isn't valid in this case, but it could be possible that she was lactose intollarant and did not have any pills on her. In that case she couldn't without getting ill, and would be justified saying "I can't."
-chris
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | 2. First the GI Joe rifle that got confiscated ...
| | | | by MAYORBOB | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 8:41am | score of 1.5 novel | | | | | | |
and now this. Just as you thought they couldn't possibly get any dumber if they tried, they go and cut another lobe off of the brain.
Tending to final details.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 80. Re: First the GI Joe rifle that got confiscated
| | | | by OSULugan | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 12:49pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 2 | | | | | |
Pfft... I took a plane flight for a wedding late last week, and encountered some interesting behavior with security myself.
On the flight from New York to Ohio, I had to surrender or check my key-chain pocket knife, which I can understand (it's a cutting instrument of some kind, even though it'd probably fold up and cut my finger off before I could effectively cut anyone else with it).
However, what I found extremely interesting was that on the return flight, I was required to check the bullet keychain I also carry (and was, in fact, on my keychain for the flight out, which was overlooked) and the refillable butane lighter that I also had taken with me on the flight out.
And God says, "No, that's not right." Yeah. Well. Whatever. You can't teach God anything.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | | | 12. Meanwhile...
| | | | by zyxwvutsr | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 9:38am | score of 5 compelling | | | | | | |
The biggest problem with all these "idiot airport security guard" anecdotes in the news is the fact that the media and the public seems to be oblivious to the unpleasant truth: The federal government promised to fix the gaping holes in the country's airport security, but has utterly failed to do so.
As New York City and the rest of America prepares to commemorate the one-year anniversary of the terrorist attacks, we still await significant changes to aviation security programs. Pilots are still unarmed, security screeners are still not hired or trained, and bomb detection equipment is still not in place.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 46. Re: Meanwhile...
| | | | by bellydancer | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 2:57pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 12 | | | | | |
The federal government promised to fix the gaping holes in the country's airport security, but has utterly failed to do so.
While you make your point well, I still fail to see how a lactating mother carrying bottles of milk onto a plane is suspect and worth hassling. Perhaps the goal you mention will be more efficiently reached by training security screeners, installing bomb detection equipment, and searching the next person in line instead of making some woman drink her breast milk.
I picked my husband up at Midway airport a few weeks ago. EVERYONE... that is every single person waiting to greet a disembarking passenger was forced to wait in the small lobby area instead of meeting their loved ones at the gate. So we wound up being a congested crowd hassled by an annoying little cop. For the life of me, I couldn't discern how situation was safer than allowing people to move about the gate area.
My point is that this shit is stupid and is beginning to reveal itself for what it is: a waste of time, a waste of dollars, and ultimately getting us no closer to having safer air travel.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | 14. This is why I won't fly
| | | | by Custer | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 9:46am | score of 2 compelling | | | | | | |
Simply put, people are continually being asked to do unreasonable things. While the chances that I personally would be asked to do something unreasonable are probably pretty low, they're much higher than they used to be and I'm simply not willing to take the risk.
What risk?
Well:
1) Not allowed on the plane. Time lost.
2) Might not be able to get ticket refunded. Money lost.
3) Might even be detained just for standing up to the guard. Freedom lost.
So, I don't fly anymore.
It's sort of like I once had a vague sense of what was expected when passing through airport security checkpoints. I even tried to be helpfull by doing things like putting all my pocket change and keys in my carry-on baggage if there was a line of annoyed travelers as a way of just making things a tad easier for everyone. Even if there was something strange (like the time I had an antique pocket watch in my baggage which I suppose looked "odd" on the x-ray machine), I never had this feeling I'd be yanked out of line for some sort of special investigation which involved taking my clothes off.
And I guess that's what it comes down to. I'm just not willing to undress or do other unreasonable things in order to be allowed to fly. I'm also not willing to risk the time, money, or freedom one now has to risk when flying. So, I'm unwilling to fly.
It's sad that you hear these stories about people being asked to drink breast milk or swamp water and actually drinking it, but I guess that's the difference between me and normals. I don't give in so easily.
Words ought to be a little wild, for they are the assault of thoughts on the unthinking. -- J. M. Keynes
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 20. Re: This is why I won't fly
| | | | by Linux Ate My Dog! | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 10:33am | score of 5 brilliant | | in reply to comment 14 | | | | | |
Well, this can become amusing. Especially since all the experienced people are being let go for failing background checks and the current crop of screeners are being recruited from ex-military, ex-cop, ex-fireman pools. You'll be seeing a lot more caucasian males at those screening machines. Some are less than prepared for real people.
Last flight, my boyfriend and me were coming back from FL, and at Tampa airport, he gest picked out of the security line after he passed the metal detector for the full screening. Wand goes over his arms, chest -- beep!. He has a stray nickle left in his shirt pocket, obviously the wand is very sensitive, so my bf knows what's coming when the wand goes over that left chest area aga-- beep! Security guy lifts his eyebrows. "What is that?"
--"Oh that." My bf opens his shirt a bit and discretely shows his nipple piercing. Security guys is squicked. Bf now is very amused -- and full of anticipation.
Sure enough, right over the belt buckle. Beep! So bf has to undo his belt buckle, wand is passed, goes lower down to-- beeep! Security guy looks up at bf.
Boyfriend goes: "I have one down there too. Wanna see it?"
--"No. No, thanks." Security guy is now really disturbed, and waves boyfriend through.
Now people who have had piercings for the last two decades all have a story where this happened to a friend or some such and they were made to strip in a private area -- but these stories were all at least ten years old in my group of friends. I guess we are going to go through a new cycle. Exhibitionists of the world rejoice!
"He's old school." -- byrne
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 51. Re: This is why I won't fly
| | | | by Calmer than You | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 3:42pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 20 | | | | | |
...all the experienced people are being let go for failing background checks and the current crop of screeners are being recruited from ex-military, ex-cop, ex-fireman pools. You'll be seeing a lot more caucasian males at those screening machines. Some are less than prepared for real people.
Yes, the "experienced" people. Where would we be without "experienced" screeners? It's hard to imagine, but without their experience, that plot to hijack four airplanes and crash them into skyscrapers would not have been thwarted. Um... nevermind. It seems from recent news stories that their primary area of experience was letting even obvious weapons through security.
Ex-cops are "less than prepared for real people?" Have you ever watched "Cops"? People don't come more "real" than that. As for firemen and military types, again you're talking about blue-collar workers. They seem pretty real to me.
Of course, if by "real people" you mean "men who stick pieces of metal through their genitals and the women who love them," then you're probably right.
I share your fear that white men might start doing the screening. I was thinking that last month at the airport, when a man of indeterminate ethnicity who spoke about three words of English was shoving a wand down my pants. "Gee," I thought, "I'm sure glad they got this functionally illiterate illegal immigrant to do the screenings instead of some white ex-cop."
clinton(23), saying(22), white(21), woman(20)
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 68. Re: This is why I won't fly
| | | | by KazaK | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 3:38am | score of 1.5 brilliant | | in reply to comment 20 | | | | | |
I was recently taken out from the line at the gate for a special screening. I happened to be carrying some pharmacuetical goodies in my bag that I had picked up in mexico. A large quantity of said goodies, unfortunately. While they were nothing dangerous, I didn't want to have to explain myself to security and risk the attention. When I was pulled from line and told to put my bag on the counter and hold my hands out for a body search, I asked the rather small woman if I could get a full cavity search for 10 bucks. She looked at me (250 lb male) in disgust, said "You just have clothes in that bag, right?" and waved me through. I breathed a sigh of relief.
KazaK
Everything in moderation, including moderation.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 76. Re: This is why I won't fly
| | | | by Linux Ate My Dog! | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 10:44am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 51 | | | | | |
It's hard to imagine, but without their experience, that plot to hijack four airplanes and crash them into skyscrapers would not have been thwarted.
Having actually read about how the hijackings happened, it is equally hard to imagine for me that the current crop of screeners would have thwarted them, since the standards of what was let on a plane at the time were different. People were allowed to board with boxcutters. Applying hindsight really is not going to help anything, but just creates a false sense of security with regards to what would actually make people safer.
As for firemen and military types, again you're talking about blue-collar workers. They seem pretty real to me.
The Boston FD is also notorious for being very homogeneous, the BPD socially enforces a rigid sense of conformity. Real enough for you, but they still have no experience with screening large parts of the actual diverse population out there for metal.
Of course, if by "real people" you mean "men who stick pieces of metal through their genitals and the women who love them," then you're probably right.
Well, those are the ones who are going to set off metal detectors these days, so yeah, they are pretty real in that job. Tough, huh?
Oh, by the way, classic assumption of heterosexuality on your part. Ready for reality.
"He's old school." -- byrne
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 82. Re: This is why I won't fly
| | | | by Calmer than You | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 1:06pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 76 | | | | | |
...it is equally hard to imagine for me that the current crop of screeners would have thwarted them, since the standards of what was let on a plane at the time were different.
Maybe. I don't hold out much hope that the new screeners are going to be significantly better. People were allowed on planes with box cutters prior to September 11, but very competent screeners might have been able to thwart the hijackings. Someone on the ball might have noticed that young middle eastern males were all carrying box cutters. That should have aroused suspicion. Even if they weren't carrying them on their persons, a competent screener would have said "gee, how often do you see someone carrying a box cutter in his carry on, let alone five people?"
It's unlikely than anyone but the most on-the-ball screener would have stopped them. But that doesn't mean they couldn't have been stopped.
Oh, by the way, classic assumption of heterosexuality on your part. Ready for reality.
In part, I plead guilty as charged. Ten years ago I would have assumed homosexuality. Then I went to college and moved to a city. Now I find that heterosexuals are almost as likely to pierce themselves in odd places as homosexuals. (I know a straight guy with a Prince Albert, for example). So yes, I assumed heterosexuality, because in my experience, the next guy I run into with dyed hair, a tight silk shirt, and all manner of unconventional piercings and who smells of cKone and is drinking a Zima is probably going to be straight.
But had I assumed homosexuality, you could have said "why are you assuming that someone with piercings is gay?"
To please you, I could have said "...and the men/women who love them," but I'll take style over political correctness nine times out of ten.
clinton(23), saying(22), white(21), woman(20)
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | 15. What's next?
| | | | by jasonm1 | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 9:47am | score of 2.5 funny | | | | | | |
What's next in this series of absurd security debacles?
Guard: I'm sorry sir, you can't bring that on the plane. It might be a weapon.
Passenger (strip searched): But that's my penis!
Guard: Well, I'm going to have to confirm that. Let me drink from it.
Ah, the possibilities for sick porn.
"Always be willing to speak your mind and a base man will avoid you" -- William Blake
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 21. Re: What's next?
| | | | by rkanodia |  | | | at Thu 8 Aug 10:37am | score of 4 funny | | in reply to comment 15 | | | | | |
There was a guy at my high school who was a pot dealer. Well there were a lot of guys who were pot dealers, but anyway one of them, a black kid with a giant Afro, got busted just outside the school grounds. He was quite athletic, lead a few officers on a merry chase. A female officer finally caught up to him, wrestled him to the ground, cuffed him, hauled him onto his feet, and started to pat him down. When she got to his groin, she shouted, "What is this?! What are you hiding between your legs?"
He roared back, "THAT'S MY DICK, BITCH!"
She yelled back at him and he quieted down, but the incident made him a sort of local legend.
On a side note, Flesch is full of shite. This post is in no way comparable to Seventeen.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | 25. What about other liquids?
| | | | by cy guy | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 10:55am | score of 1.5 astute | | | | | | |
I haven't seen any guidance that we aren't supposed to bring liquids on to planes anymore, so I imagine lots of people bring things like perfume, hair gel, shampoo, contact lens solution, nail polish, nail polish remover etc. onto the plane.
If these are found during a search does the guard make you taste them to show they aren't hazardous? And what if you were a terrorist, wouldn't you anticipate a situation like this and only bring a substance that by itself was inert and only when combined with another otherwise inert substane became a weapon? Like bleach and ammonia for example? Nail polish remover in particular is a powerful solvent and could have potential as weapon component.
"Everybody's plastic, but I love plastic. I want to be plastic."-Andy Warhol
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | | | | | 35. The Guard's thought process..and a meme
| | | | by VesuviusDC | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 2:32pm | score of 2 brilliant | | | | | | |
(Guard sees the milk)
hmmmmmm .... that could be in those baby bottles? could it be baby milk?
Wait! It could be liquid anthrax! What's if it's anthrax! Oh man, I'm gonna be famous! Joe's not gonna believe this one!
Wait, how am I gonna tell if it's anthrax! I know! I'll have her open them all up, exposing everyone around here to whatever it is and make her drink them! Yeah, that's it!
This guy just disqualified himself from being a guard of the Evil Overlord .
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 40. The most disturbing part of the story...
| | | | by grimbil | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 2:41pm | score of 1 | | | | | | |
....is the quote from her lawyer:
Civil rights lawyer Ron Kuby said: "I'm all for random searches . . . but I do think the number of Caucasian, lactating mothers who have passed through al-Qaida training camps is negligible."
So if it was a Middle-Eastern, lactating mother, it would be ok to force her to drink the milk?
Beware the leader who bangs the drum of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor. For patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Julius Caesar.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 41. Inconsistent airport security
| | | | by Awesome Gary | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 2:48pm | score of 2.5 intriguing | | | | | | |
I live in Manhattan and work in Boston, commuting every week via the Delta Shuttle. Over the past few months, I've done a little experimenting with airport security and found it to be incredibly inconsistent.
I carry a Nalgene water bottle every week (OK, sometimes It's a rum and Coke bottle) A few months ago, they were pretty strict about asking me to drink whatever was in the bottle, but I've been asked much less frequently in the past couple of weeks. I've never been asked to drink the contents of the shampoo bottle I carry in the same bag.
I've taken to wearing the same clothes on Monday and Friday (don't worry, socks and boxers get changed) and removing everything from my pockets. Despite this, the frequency with which I set off the walk though metal detector seems pretty random.
The thoroughness of the hand check is also very inconsistent. (If I've got time, I'll sometimes force one by keeping change in my pocket) Sometimes I'm asked remove my shoes (again, always the same pair on Monday and Friday) and sometimes I'm not. Sometimes when I am asked to remove my shoes the guards will just wand my feet, other times they'll wand my feet and shoes. Sometimes my shoes get looked over pretty good, turned this way and that pried apart a bit, etc. Still other times they'll swab my shoes and run the swab though a bomb sniffer.
I'm not sure what the required safety check consists of, and what, if any parts are optional, but I'm not too confident that the screeners know either.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 58. Re: Inconsistent airport security
| | | | by entroloper | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 7:22pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 41 | | | | | |
I certainly don't support some of the extremes that people have been forced into, but wouldn't predictability contribute directly to the ability for someone to thwart the system? Arguments regarding "security through obscurity" aside, knowing that either your feet and/or your shoes will be wanded or possibly swabbed would seem to lessen the likelihood that you will try to involve those items in something undesirable....
...What's all the hubub, bub?
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 70. Re: Inconsistent airport security
| | | | by ct | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 5:47am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 41 | | | | | |
I just had to add that while I've been forced to drink my bottle of aquafina, it's usually by a security guard who's hitting on me (asking for my business cards when he finds them and that sort of thing.) But. I had a one way ticket from SFO to DCA via Houston. I was wearing flip flops, tight yoga pants and a tight sweater over a tank top. I got patted down despite my protests that there was no way I was hiding anything in my outfit. The weirdest part was that they made me TAKE OFF my flip flops. I'm talking Old Navy rubber flip flops! I know I had a one-way ticket, but making me take of my flip flops was a new level of absurdity as far as I was concerned; when I wore those flip flops earlier this week on a round-trip flights I was waived right through security.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | 42. Give me a bottle of that!
| | | | by somebaudy | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 2:49pm | score of 1 | | | | | | |
Breast milk meets perfectly the need of the children that drinks it.
Breast-fed children are less prone to obesity, they're more intellectually developped. Breast milk boosts the immune system...
So the question is not why are we surprised when an adult is forced to drink some. THe questions is: why are adult not drinking something that good for the health?
[sig]"insert something witty here"
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 47. On a good day,it's all an overly long MASH episode | | | | by Lobstermeyer | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 3:02pm | score of 2 clever | | | | | | |
After the holidays last Christmas I brought my mother - who is Irish - to the airport for her flight home. Now despite having lived in this country for 30 years, my mother does not realize the ridiculous extremes of our situation here in America nowadays. Looking casually into her carry-on bag, I noticed her (12 inch?) knitting needles and got all excited about them, "Mom, they won't let you bring those on the plane...these days they are really strict about that sort of thing."
"Go on outta that!" she said, "I'm a grandmother," and therewith marched merrily (and completely confidently) through security, and onto the flight, knitting needles intact and unexamined.
It's a good thing Logan Airport doesn't have a history of significant security breaches...or I would feel very insecure in my job, which prompts me to use that facility about two to three times a month.
But as much as I might hate the airport security bastards, it's nothing to my feelings for the snobby propertied West Suburban residents with no "No Commerical Airlines at Hanscom" bumper stickers... If I ever see one of those SOBs in a Logan parking garage, the owner is in for a rude awakening.
STRASSER: What is your nationality? RICK (pokerfaced): I'm a drunkard.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 48. Re: On a good day,it's all an overly long MASH
| | | | by ignatiusreilly | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 3:22pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 47 | | | | | |
It's a good thing Logan Airport doesn't have a history of significant security breaches
Uh, didn't BOTH of the aircraft that were flown into the World Trade Center depart from Logan? Or is the sarcasm detector on my browser not working properly?
Give me reincarnation, or give me death.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | 55. annoying
| | | | by vixey | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 5:39pm | score of 1 | | | | | | |
I flew Detroit to Maui this past April with 6 stops. Some how, on 5 out of 6 of those stops, I was picked for a "random" search. How the heck is it that a half asleep, super pale, red haired 20 year old is picked FIVE times in day? I just don't get it. They did the wand thingie every time, but never once did they question the pocket knife in my carry on....
My goal in life is to be the kind of person my dog thinks I am.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 61. Re: annoying
| | | | by tbo | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 7:54pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 55 | | | | | |
Some how, on 5 out of 6 of those stops, I was picked for a "random" search. How the heck is it that a half asleep, super pale, red haired 20 year old is picked FIVE times in day?
You wouldn't also happen to be attractive and female, would you? I ask because that could explain a lot...
To add a little more content to the story, I'll mention my own recent air travel experiences. I flew out of Vancouver International with a large pair of scissors in my carry-on (I had forgotten they were there, as I use the same bag for work), and didn't get stopped. The dinky little airport in Kelowna did notice, however.
I flew from Toronto International to Richmond, Virginia, and was picked "randomly" for a second search (I was first in line at the gate--there was nothing random about it). On the way back from Richmond, the guard spent forever wanding me and my shoes after I set off the metal detector, but didn't even bother to look at my laptop (even after I reminded him).
Sometimes the screeners look at my cell phone, sometimes they don't. In any case, I'm sure anyone with half a brain could smuggle a bomb past these inconsistent, incompetent fools.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | 60. definitely not a militant breastfeeder ;)
| | | | by klothos | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 7:53pm | score of 1 | | | | | | |
Knowing that drinking from a bottle would contaminate the breastmilk, I can't say that I blame her for refusing to drink from the bottles -- however the guard should have taken her offer of dropping some on her arm and tasting it like that. There's absolutely no reason why he should have done it in the first place, but for what he was asking, her offer should have sufficed.
I'm curious as to why she said it was disgusting and embarrassing. It's just breastmilk, and it's a whole helluvalot better for humans than the milk of a different species, which we routinely drink....
www.mothering.com
www.lalecheleague.org
www.breastfeeding.com
(It is strange for me to hear of a breastfeeding mother who refers to her own breastmilk as anything other than humanity's perfect food...)
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 64. Remember
| | | | by nuggsgalore | | | | at Thu 8 Aug 9:51pm | score of 1.5 funny | | | | | | |
DO NOT leave your connecting flight with a used airsickness bag.
"Sir What's in the bag"
"Uh"
"I afraid your are going have to take a shooter of that liquid there"
"I cant"
"What are you some kinda terrorist"
"Uh"
"Cornhole him boys"
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 66. We need a new category on Plastic
| | | | by LeighBCD | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 12:45am | score of 1 obnoxious | | | | | | |
.... called "Stupid Lawsuits". At least every 3 days, we are discussing some ridiculous case brought by some greedy person. How, how, how has this woman been traumatised in any way, whatsoever? Sure, the guard is a dope, but is this an issue worth suing over?? People like her make me want to scream. I will throw myself off a cliff in despair if this woman gets one penny in compensation.
To rose-lipt maidens and lightfoot lads
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 67. Re: We need a new category on Plastic
| | | | by Cwis | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 1:31am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 66 | | | | | |
I disagree.
Perhaps the publicity from this and the cost to the security company will actually stop other innocent people from being harassed?
Perhaps procedures will be implemented by the company to make sure it does not happen again?
The only way to change a companies policies is very often by using bad publicity and costing them money.
You do what with your what whats?
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 69. Re: We need a new category on Plastic
| | | | by jdioguardi | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 5:37am | score of 1.5 astute | | in reply to comment 67 | | | | | |
Perhaps the publicity from this and the cost to the security company will actually stop other innocent people from being harassed?
Perhaps procedures will be implemented by the company to make sure it does not happen again?
and perhaps pigs will fly out of my butt
somewhere in Texas a village is missing its idiot.........
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 71. Re: We need a new category on Plastic
| | | | by LeighBCD | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 6:00am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 67 | | | | | |
The only response I can make to your comments is to say that the money this company spends in compensation to this woman could be better spent in training the staff so that they do not make mistakes like this in the future. At the end of the day, stupid lawsuits hit the consumer because insurance premiums go up as a consequence of them so prices rise - that is one reason why this case is bad. Perhaps more compellingly, is it not a good thing that this security guard was being over-zealous? I would prefer that a guard is over eager and gets it wrong than he be fast asleep on the job and allow a terrorist to waltz on through. You know, if because of this silly lawsuit the security company stops checking passengers as stringently, we will all lose out, make no mistake about it.
To rose-lipt maidens and lightfoot lads
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 74. Re: We need a new category on Plastic
| | | | by ignatiusreilly | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 8:28am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 67 | | | | | |
First of all, this is not a "security company" we're talking about. All security screeners have been federalized and work for the USTSA.
Second, the American legal system's purview does not include "teaching lessons" and "costing defendants money."
Third, no lawsuit has been filed, and yet there has been plenty of the publicity that you feel is essential for change. Mission accomplished without cluttering the courts.
Not every wrong (or perceived wrong) has a corresponding legal right to compensation. Frivolous lawsuits share an ignorance of this fact. A separate category on Plastic could easily be filled with similar matters.
Give me reincarnation, or give me death.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 72. Re: We need a new category on Plastic
| | | | by Irontom | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 7:45am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 71 | | | | | |
1. How would they know they had made a mistake if this woman hadn't raised a stink?
2. How would we know they got the point if they didn't suffer some financial loss as a result of their COMPLETE AND UTTER INCOMPETENCE.
3. I would rather the guy be vigilant and get it right. You present the other two as if they were the only possibilities.
Shooting is not too good for my enemies.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 73. Re: We need a new category on Plastic
| | | | by LeighBCD | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 8:11am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 72 | | | | | |
Irontom, your post has given me much food for thought. Here are my thoughts:-
1. How would they know they had made a mistake if this woman hadn't raised a stink?
For a start, she can write a strongly worded letter of complaint to the head of the company and plague him until she gets an apology. She has garnered a lot of publicity - she has made her point, she should stop now rather than go to court.
2. How would we know they got the point if they didn't suffer some financial loss as a result of their COMPLETE AND UTTER INCOMPETENCE.
The logical extension of this argument is that every single mistake (whether large or small) made by a corporation must automatically be punishable with a financial penalty. This is crazy. What is the damage here? Nobody died or got injured. Nobody suffered any loss. No harm was caused. The worst thing that happened was this woman had to drink some of her own breast milk. So what? Her baby drinks it without complaint. Complete and utter incompetence on the part of the guard it may have been but I do not see that this woman should be entitled to any monetary compensation just because she was embarrassed by this harmless incident.
3. I would rather the guy be vigilant and get it right.
I have no argument with you there. But personally, I prefer that security guards check everyone thoroughly and occasionally make a mistake than for them to take a "hands-off" approach for fear that someone else might sue them in the future over an incident as trivial as this. At the end of the day, the guard was acting in the interests of the safety of everybody on that plane and if she is pissed off about his over-zealousness, then surely that is her problem.
To rose-lipt maidens and lightfoot lads
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 79. Re: We need a new category on Plastic
| | | | by TRACKYOURPOSITION | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 12:14pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 73 | | | | | |
The logical extension of this argument is that every single mistake (whether large or small) made by a corporation must automatically be punishable with a financial penalty.
The logical extension of YOUR argument is that corporations can make an infinite number of "small", degrading, humiliating mistakes with impunity. A more reasonable idea--just give small mistakes small financial penalties.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 78. Re: We need a new category on Plastic
| | | | by TRACKYOURPOSITION | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 12:08pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 66 | | | | | |
I will personally send her $.01 dollars if you promise to commit suicide because of said payment. Weighing the annoyances of overlitigiousness against those of power tripping authority figures in the War on Terror, I can only make one recommendation. Sue, sue, sue, sue!
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 83. Re: We need a new category on Plastic
| | | | by Orbie | | | | at Fri 9 Aug 1:49pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 66 | | | | | |
Kuby said the suburban woman is not looking to sue over the incident.
Even the Ananova article doesn't say she is suing. What I have read in several stories is that she just wants to let others know what happened so that it might be avoided in the future.
And besides, the policy on having to drink from containers supposedly has been changed since this incident (not sure if that's everywhere or just there), which makes some sense. As someone else mentioned, I have never been asked to drink from my shampoo container or my bottle of fingernail polish.
You are god ... choose wisely.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| |
| | Member Login | | | |
|
