I know a lot women her age who'd like to have every part of them groped beyond belief. So what's she complaining about?

Well it is good to see that the federal marshalls are paying attention to there jobs and not just there to get a paycheck. It just goes to show the rest of the world that the U.S is no longer asleep at the homefront.

Am I the only one or is there something missing from this story?

Didn't Matt Welch cover two European journalists getting snagged at LAX sometime during the summer under the same insane application of this law? And the Times did a brief follow-up? Isn't it time for someone to take a harder look at this?

Raven, I think you're right it was something Matt commented on. In my dim memory they also were Australian. If I get some time I'll look for it.

French and Brits:
http://reason.com/hitandrun/001615.shtml

Thanks Amy. I turned your url into a link.

Thanks for the pointer, Kevin.

--Kynn

If she was black (or Middle Eastern) you would claim that they were racist or picking on people based on their nationality.

Now because they pick on the pretty white journalist you claim they are stupid.

*NEWS FLASH*

They are BOTH racist AND stupid.
The next terrorist will come through as easy as before, as the customs agents cavity search your grandmother

My experience wasn't so much humiliating, and i wasn't groped - but I was set free onto the streets of LA by the intense Homeland defense that surrounds the USA.

Flight from Auckland to London - flight stops in LAX for refueling, all passengers made to clear customs and collect baggage - given "Transit" cards - to allow access back onto flight. Passport is checked and stamped with entry though... Check baggage back with staff - then herded up a hallway to join crowds queing to get to boarding gates.

Take a left turn, open door - walk out onto sidewalk - where I could have hailed a cab and walked off to "look for America"...

All the security in the world ain't gonna stop stupidity!

And while you may think America is awake on the homefront Harry, it's not worth all the honey glazed prop turkeys in the world, if you're not looking in the right direction.

She must be a terrorist. Look at that hat.

I am getting severely embarrassed about my government. Security measures are going from the inane to the incredibly stupid. If you block journalists but not tourists, in an attempt to stop terrorists, then all the terrorists will come in as tourists with appropriate tickets and vacation plans for Disneyland.

What this is in all likelihood is an attempt to stop foreign journalists from coming in and writing articles about what fantastic lame-asses Bush and his little friends are, with the blackball given to any journalist who might even conceivably critical of Bush (ie. one not working for a Murdoch paper). That a non-Murdoch aussie journalist might come here to do any other interviews--such as with Olivia Newton John, who obviously still warrants press in Australia--is beyond the scope of their tiny brains.

Instead, they groped the editor of what looks to be a prim and proper ladies magazine.

They have not begun to smell the stink she's going to raise.

They should have paid attention to the hat.

"...a US Customs spokesman said: 'She threw a tantrum and was threateningly abusive.'"

Likely story, Bushitler fascist!

Indeed this is excessive, but the reasoning makes a little bit of sense. The likely reason behind this is that a great deal of intelligence agents are placed under the cover of being journalists. This is still a vastly overblown response, but foreign journalists are being targetted more for reasons that are likely not directly related to negative international press for the United States' recent actions.

'She threw a tantrum and was threateningly abusive'
was this after they started groping, or did they start groping because of this.

It is of course entirely reasonable that people should be groped if they're not nice.

Was she taken off to be questioned because she was threatening and abusive or because she was a foreign journalist (from one of U.S.A's allies)? It seems more reasonable that it was the second and not the first.

Am I missing something here? Did the woman fly over on the 90-day Tourist pass and then answer "business" to the "are you here for business or pleasure?". Was that it?

Is this a new interpretation of the visa rules? AFAIK one needs a business visa when going over for work....? Or is that a new thing?

Visa Waiver Program
"What Do I Need to Enter the United States under the VWP?

To enter the U.S. under the VWP, travelers from participating countries must:

Be a citizen of a Visa Waiver Program country;

Have a valid passport issued by the participating countrythat is valid for six months beyond your intended visit; Have a machine-readable passport (MRP), following the required due dates for MRPs explained above;

Be seeking entry for 90 days or less, as a temporary visitor for business or pleasure. You will not be permitted to extend your visit or change to another visa category under the VWP."

Australia is a member of the VWP.

She had the perfect right to enter the US on a VWP and do business for up to 90 days.

I must therefore assume she didn't use a VWP.

The Magician, if you look closely you will see that certain very small subsets (mostly Journalists) are excluded from the Visa Waiver Program.

Yes, this sucks.

Yes, this is stupid.

Yes, the free speech zone is round the corner, five blocks down, behind that brick wall.

Z.