Rand Paul detained: Rep. refuses airport patdown after alarm

In a harshly worded attack on the Transportation Security Administration, which handles security screenings at US airports, Ron Paul, known for his strident libertarian views, said the TSA 'gropes and grabs our kids and our seniors and does nothing to keep us safe.'

Charles Dharapak/AP/File
In this Jan. 7 photo, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., son of Republican presidential candidate, Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, campaigns for his father at Windham High School in Windham, N.H. Paul says he was stopped briefly by security at the Nashville airport, Monday, Jan. 23, 2012, when a scanner found an 'anomaly' on his knee.

Republican Senator Rand Paul was stopped at an airport on Monday for setting off an alarm and refusing a patdown, prompting his father, U.S. presidential candidate Ron Paul, to accuse security officials of being part of an "out of control" police state.

In a harshly worded attack on the Transportation Security Administration, which handles security screenings at U.S. airports, Ron Paul, known for his strident libertarian views, said the TSA "gropes and grabs our kids and our seniors and does nothing to keep us safe."

After Rand Paul refused the patdown, he was escorted out of the airport security area in Nashville,Tennessee, by local authorities, the TSA said. Paul missed his flight to Washington, but was later rebooked and rescreened without incident.

As favorites of the anti-Washington Tea Party movement, Paul and his father, who is a U.S. Represenative from Texas, have helped lead the charge against what critics call excessive federal intrusion, from healthcare to body searches.

At a Senate hearing last June, Rand Paul challenged TSA Administrator John Pistole over his agency's random patdowns of travelers at airports, including the case of a 6-year-old girl from his home state of Kentucky.

"This isn't to say that we don't believe in safety procedures," Paul said. "But I think I feel less safe because you're doing these invasive exams on a six-year-old. It makes me think you're clueless that you think she's going to attack our country and that you're not doing your research on the people who would attack our country."

On the campaign trial, Ron Paul has called for the abolition of the TSA on the grounds that it wastes taxpayer money and violates personal liberties.

Rand Paul has recommended that authorities eliminate patdowns as part of everyday security, saying TSA should more heavily emphasize non-invasive methods for assessing risk.

The senator has even complained that close screening of members of Congress and other frequent fliers known to airlines and security officials is a poor use of security resources.

TSA DEFENDS PROCEDURES

The TSA was created following the Sept. 11, 2001, airplane attacks by al Qaeda on the United States.

Full body imaging and patdowns at U.S. airports began in 2010, and immediately triggered a public backlash and fire from both sides of the political aisle.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a leading member of the Obama administration, weighed in on the controversy at the time, saying she would avoid pat downs if possible.

More than 650 million passengers fly on U.S. airlines, most using one of the more than 400 airports where TSA operates checkpoints.

The agency defends its procedures, which they say are needed to ensure passenger safety.

Paul's personal showdown with airport security unfolded as he headed to Washington to address an anti-abortion rally and to return to work after a long congressional holiday break.

The senator's father, Ron Paul, tweeted that his son was detained for refusing a full-body pat-down "after anomaly in body scanner."

The TSA did not say what triggered the alarm and denied Paul had been detained.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.