See:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/tsa-defends-pat-year-kan-airport-16215862#.T6RGaqv2agQ
I'll summarize:
---
The grandmother of a 4-year-old girl who became hysterical during a security screening at a Kansas airport said Wednesday that the child was forced to undergo a pat-down after hugging her, with security agents yelling and calling the crying girl an uncooperative suspect.
The child's grandmother, Lori Croft, told The Associated Press that Brademeyer and her daughter, Isabella, initially passed through security at the Wichita airport without incident. The girl then ran over to briefly hug Croft, who was awaiting a pat-down after tripping the alarm, and that's when TSA agents insisted the girl undergo a physical pat-down.
Isabella had just learned about "stranger danger" at school, her grandmother said, adding that the girl was afraid and unsure about what was going on.
"She started to cry, saying 'No I don't want to,' and when we tried talking to her she ran," Croft said. "They yelled, 'We are going to shut down the airport if you don't grab her.'"
---
Massive stupidity ensues on the part of the TSA.
Now, once it becomes a widely read story, does the TSA apologize and essentially say - "We're sorry. We could have done this in a lot better, less traumatic, thoughtful and professional way?"
No, they say: "TSA has reviewed the incident and determined that our officers followed proper screening procedures in conducting a modified pat-down on the child," the agency said.
(sarcasm) Ah, what tact and professionalism. (/sarcasm)
No, IMO, these people, in general, as viewed from the pronouncements from the very top *are* thugs.
What they did was legal. But it wasn't necessary, reasonable or the way any reasonable person would handle things.
The fact that they take every opportunity to defend what's indefensible in any reasonable person's mind just show the "thug" mentality they have.
Sure, I'd guess there's quite a few nice TSA people. But the thuggishness comes from the top. I think much is the same with most police forces.
They can, so they do. And not only that, they defend their actions to the maximum.
That's the definition of a thug, IMO. "I can, legally, be a total ass, and I know that the top brass will defend my "assish-ness" to the maximum. So, FOAD, ya powerless loser!"
Perhaps your definition of "thug" doesn't include the above, but I think for most of us, the reasonable definition of a thug certainly includes this kind of attitude and behavior. And this thugish behavior is vigorously defended to the maximum by the people all the way to the top.
If we were seeing people get fired and publicly so - taking strong legal action against them, and very strongly defending the dignity of the passengers - then perhaps there'd be some argument about them being the "government's thugs." But as it is, they do most everything they do without any serious push back from anyone senior at the TSA.
In my world, that means they're doing what the TSA wants them to do - and thus, these thugs *are* government thugs.
-Greg