Government

Napolitano: You Will Soon Be Able to ‘Keep Your Shoes On’ at U.S. Airports

Napolitano Says that Shoes Will Soon Stay On at Airports Once Again

Sick of having to wear slip-ons to the airport in order to get through security in a timely manner? Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced Tuesday that travelers will eventually be able to keep their shoes on once again while passing through security airports.

“We are moving towards an intelligence and risk-based approach to how we screen,” Napolitano told POLITICO’s Mike Allen during a morning forum at the Newseum. “I think one of the first things you will see over time is the ability to keep your shoes on. One of the last things you will [see] is the reduction or limitation on liquids.”

Napolitano said that research and development efforts for technology to solve the shoe ordeal at airports are progressing, but the technology to perform quick scans that distinguish harmless and explosive liquids is at a stand still.

Travelers were first told to remove their shoes at airport security checkpoints following the unsuccessful terrorist attack by Richard Reid, the man who attempted to set off explosives hidden in his shoes during a flight in December 2001.

POLITICO also reports that Napolitano indicated that the implementation of any hard-and-fast rules to address public disapproval of certain TSA practices could open a major gap in security.

“’We can’t adopt blanket exclusions because the exclusion is exploited by those who seek to do evil,’ she said at the POLITICO event.”

As we reported earlier, the Homeland Security secretary is also in little bit of a spat with conservative aggregator Matt Drudge, which she spoke off briefly when asked at the Tuesday event (read The Blaze’s coverage of this here).

CBS News reports that Napolitano also said the government has deployed extra security measures as the tenth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks approaches.

Comments (116)

1 2 3 4
  • khaosmaximus
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 5:19pm

    What? Is the TSA actually going to use technology and profiling to aid in determining just cause for invasive searches? Or is this just a political ploy in an attempt to improve President Obama’s futile run for a second term???

    Report Post » khaosmaximus  
  • kindling
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 5:10pm

    It drives me nuts to think my 13 year old daughter must either be x-rayed so some perv behind the wall can look at her naked body or be molested in front of a line of strangers both coming and going in orde to fly. I would drive her but there simply is not enough time so we are forced to go along with government mandated RAPE! This is NOT makiing flying any safer, this is a FU to the people of America. We have to get these idoits out of the White House and get reason back in the country. STOP RAPING OUR CHILDREN!

    Report Post » kindling  
  • NotPoliticallyCorrect
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 5:06pm

    Oh I get it. Those pervy TSA agents looking at my x-ray will get to see me with my pumps on now…

    Report Post » NotPoliticallyCorrect  
    • biohazard23
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 5:21pm

      Yeah, and they will still threaten to take away my Urban Decay eyeliner because the now-discontinued packaging appears “threatening.”

      Report Post » biohazard23  
    • loriann12
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 9:32pm

      I’ll be more impressed if they stop making breast cancer survivors whip out their prosthetic in “private.” That’s in quotes because I would never let them get me alone in a room.

      Report Post »  
    • PATRIOTMAMA
      Posted on September 7, 2011 at 8:54am

      Well ya, they want to see you with your pumps and stiletto’s on now, it makes your legs look oh so sexy in the “I can see you naked” machines. Give me a break, how about not looking at us under our clothes Janet?!!! I prefer not to be virtually strip searched especially since I haven’t COMMITTED ANY CRIMES!!!! Oooo this woman!!!

      Report Post »  
  • TomFerrari
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 5:05pm

    good post, tpaine!

    Report Post » TomFerrari  
  • FLyoverman
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 5:04pm

    They could not stop a terrorist act if it was being planned in front of them.

    Report Post »  
    • CatB
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 10:45pm

      Which is why I refuse to fly commercial …

      TEA!

      Report Post »  
  • Dustyluv
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:55pm

    Well said…I don’t fly anymore because I would beat the crap out of a TSA Agent that touched my junk.

    Report Post »  
  • Bearfoot
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:54pm

    Happy days are here again. Yahooo! ;-(

    Report Post » Bearfoot  
  • Ex_Masshole
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:53pm

    “We are moving towards an intelligence and risk-based approach to how we screen.”

    I’ll believe it when I see it.

    Report Post » Ex_Masshole  
    • fatsomann
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 5:22pm

      We are talking about the government here. I’m with you.

      Report Post » fatsomann  
  • Banter
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:50pm

    If they really thought the liquids were an issue they would be thrown out in some type of explosion proof box. But, the bottle of water (other liquids) they are so concerned about is dumped in a garbage can in the middle of hundreds of people going through security.

    Airport security does nothing to make you safer, just less free.

    Report Post » Banter  
    • Dustyluv
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:56pm

      Good point.

      Report Post »  
    • AngelAuthor
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 5:24pm

      Damn straight.

      Report Post »  
    • squeaker
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 5:36pm

      Never even thought about it… good point.

      Report Post »  
    • meddlehead
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 7:05pm

      The institutional degradation we suffer at the hands of Thousands Standing Around agents makes me feel like the terrorists won after all. Profiling,heavy police presence in transportation hubs and bomb sniffing dogs would keep us truly safer. I don’t what this current strategy is all about.

      Report Post » meddlehead  
  • Midwest Blonde
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:50pm

    Since I’ve quit flying, who cares?

    (I quit flying because I don’t like flying and I have moved closer to the area I generally vacation at (now it’s a 10 hour drive with no BS) – hence no more flying so I’ve never had to put up with the airport BS, and for sure now, will not get back to flying anywhere..)

    Report Post » Midwest Blonde  
  • AnAmerican111
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:49pm

    Kind of hard to believe someone that has shown to be so clueless in most of her comments about anything!.
    …

    Report Post »  
  • TomFerrari
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:48pm

    wow.

    I’m non-plussed.
    We’ve been asking for Israeli-ish screening for some time now, and were belittled for it.
    Now, they’re working on it.

    Notice how I used the word, “THEY’RE,” instead of the word, “THERE.”
    It’s really easy to do. (Notice also how I used, “IT’S“ with an apostrophe because it is an contraction of ”IT IS,“ and not the possessive form of ”IT.” Contrast this to how theblaze.com spells their articles, presented to us as “JOURNALISM.” I cite THIS VERY article for example, where theblaze.com states, “she spoke OFF briefly,” when they should have stated, “she spoke OF briefly.” It’s a little thing, but, it is a mistake that professional “journalists” should not make, let alone with such regularity.
    .
    .
    .

    Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • Anonymous T. Irrelevant
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 5:07pm

      Tom
      You’re just going to drive yourself batty trying to correct the atrocious spelling here. I just over-look it, but, wow, I thought we conservatives were better spellers. I cannot believe the spelling of some people. I, myself, have to think twice at some words, but these are simple words people are misspelling. Give them the benefit of the doubt and attribute it to fast typing or auto-correcting software.

      Report Post » Anonymous T. Irrelevant  
  • jmgair
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:48pm

    The only guy that will be happy about this is Richard Ried the shoe bomber, who is Harry’s Muslim cousin if you did not know that.

    Report Post »  
  • totallyfedup2
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:46pm

    Now if we could just get them to stop grabbing our junk

    Report Post » totallyfedup2  
    • Sheepdog911
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:49pm

      I’m thrilled. Just when I was getting used to travelling in flip plops. Now get your hands out of my knickers.

      Report Post » Sheepdog911  
  • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:44pm

    Now the administration will simply make the restrictions for travel at the airlines even harsher and harsher until they become draconian. Watch and be warned, that will most likely be the next step.
    http://artinphoenix.com/gallery/grimm (cat folk gallery)

    Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
  • IAM-AMERICAN
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:44pm

    Thank you Big SIS for giving back this morcel of dignity.

    Report Post » IAM-AMERICAN  
  • IAM-AMERICAN
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:42pm

    Thank you Big SIS for being nice and giving me back this morcel of dignity!

    Report Post » IAM-AMERICAN  
  • cessna152
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:42pm

    Napolitano: You Will Soon Be Able to ‘Keep Your Shoes On’ at U.S. Airports…but you will need to remove your pants and under garments.

    Report Post » cessna152  
    • Vechorik
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:47pm

      To heck with big sis — GIVE ME JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO! (who endorses Ron Paul btw)

      Report Post »  
  • mwhaley
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:42pm

    Why are progressive women so ugly?

    Report Post »  
    • I.Gaspar
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:46pm

      Come on…she dolled up for these photos.
      Nice touch, the pearl necklace…and it appears that her clothes might actually be made for females.
      If you didn’t know better, you might actually think she’s not a man.

      Report Post »  
    • IAM-AMERICAN
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:46pm

      Yes even in they’re black heart of hearts!

      Report Post » IAM-AMERICAN  
    • SREGN
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:57pm

      Works its way from the inside out.

      Report Post »  
    • ProbIemSoIver
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 5:04pm

      there is something to that phenom. She is a something similar to a Xenophile. people that are attracted to any race or culture that is not of their Country or Race.
      It is a mental disorder. People that are Ugly, or Nerdy or Social outcasts.
      They dislike attractive, confident, assertive people; People that are civil, social, and successful.
      They latch on to minority group, social outcasts and the like because that is how they look at themselves. I would say 90% of liberals have this disorder.

      Report Post » ProbIemSoIver  
    • biohazard23
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 5:32pm

      Because they want to be protected as a special group that faces discrimination on a daily basis, just like every other “victim”/special interest group out there.

      http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/opinion/sunday/ugly-you-may-have-a-case.html

      Report Post » biohazard23  
    • meddlehead
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 7:06pm

      P@nis envy

      Report Post » meddlehead  
  • RightUnite
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:41pm

    Oh! Aren’t we just so lucky???!!! Uuuggghhh!

    Report Post »  
  • squeaker
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:41pm

    Hey BLAZE… Is this Weight Loss day or something…. you keep showing photos of Pat….opps I mean janet

    Report Post »  
  • South Philly Boy
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:40pm

    They will be using TSA SNIFFER NOSES

    Report Post » South Philly Boy  
  • MODEL82A1
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:39pm

    El Al has successfully used “an intelligence and risk-based approach to how (they) screen” for decades. If combating terrorists were this regime’s REAL goal, they would simply duplicate what has proven to work elsewhere. Sadly, it is not and they (obviously) will not.

    Report Post » MODEL82A1  
  • ProbIemSoIver
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:37pm

    Now she won’t have to remove her combat boots.

    Report Post » ProbIemSoIver  
  • jollylama
    Posted on September 6, 2011 at 4:34pm

    this is one ugly dude..

    Report Post »  
    • squeaker
      Posted on September 6, 2011 at 5:40pm

      Hey, Imagine 72 virgins looking just like her…!!! —- Might make suicide bombers think twice… lol

      Report Post »  
    • johnj1952
      Posted on September 7, 2011 at 10:12pm

      72 Virgins? Did the price or reward go up for killing infidels?

      Report Post » johnj1952  
1 2 3 4

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love