Stop TSA Scanners

Chris Elliott examines the TSA PR machine

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 06:46:00 +0000

This post from last week (in case you missed it) is a must read: The Huffington Post blogger asks, "Are we better off without the TSA?"

Good question. Lame answer.

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Sun, 04 Mar 2012 02:11:00 +0000

Instead of actually investigating what happens time and time again to the disabled at airports, a newspaper portends to answer a letter by quoting the TSA policies:

Q: Would you please answer a question or find the answer for those of us who have lost a body part in a battle with breast cancer? What should we expect when we walk through the scanners (at the airport)? If the scanners are any good, they will certainly spot a breast prosthesis, then what? Will the Transportation Security Administration employee reviewing the scan be able to recognize the prosthesis and pass it as benign? Will we have to go through a further security check like a pat down?
— Sandra, Muscatine

A: From Jim Fotenos, TSA spokesman: “TSA respects the privacy of all passengers. They have been trained to safely and respectfully screen all passengers, including those with medical devices.
“TSA has created an optional communication card that helps travelers discreetly inform TSA officers about any disability, medical condition or medical device that could affect security screening. Travelers can write their information on the wallet-sized card and hand it to the security officer. While these cards do not exempt anyone from security screening, they allow passengers to communicate information about their medical conditions to the officers discreetly.

“TSA recommends passengers advise our officers of the medical device; passengers will not be required to expose these devices for inspection. Security officers should not ask you to remove medical devices during the screening process and you should be offered private screening by a same-gender officer if additional screening is required to complete the inspection process.”

Watch out: AK, CO, KY, PA, and SD

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Sat, 03 Mar 2012 02:09:00 +0000

TSA press releases, disguised as 'news', show that small airports in Arkansas (Where the lie that this will "speed up the screening process and reduce the number of pat-downs" is being propagated. Still.), Sioux Falls, Scranton, Lexington, and Louisville now have naked scanners. Colorado Springs, meanwhile, is blowing a bunch of money to make room for the obscene devices.

Interesting spam

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Fri, 02 Mar 2012 02:00:00 +0000

I deleted a comment which was nonetheless interesting. It was advertising a website that does training for airport screeners. As Ludwig von Mises said in his groundbreaking book, Socialism:

[The bureaucratic mind] classifies activity according to the capacity for undertaking it formally acquired by means of examinations and a certain period of service. 'Training' and 'length of service' are the only things which the official brings to the 'job'. If the work of a body of officials appears unsatisfactory, there can be only one explanation: the officials have not had the right training, and future appointments must be made differently.

So there is an industry that has cropped up in the last decade to train and re-train TSA agents and their superiors and colleagues in DHS. When the real problem is the bureau and agencies themselves, not the training of the officials!

Security at the Superbowl

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Sat, 18 Feb 2012 23:45:00 +0000

Before the Superbowl, there were confirmed reports of a DHS presence, including bag searches and x-ray ray scanners for bags and trucks. As if that wasn't bad enough, there were also rumors that naked scanners would be employed.

When I read this, I though "Welcome to your police state."

So what actually happened? It was arguably much worse in some ways. The night before, we got this report:

Helicopters and planes equipped with special monitors for radiation and biological agents constantly hover and scan high above Super Bowl village...

In addition to air patrol, on the ground police use giant x-ray machines to scan every vehicle arriving at the stadium, and surveillance cameras, which allow officers to monitor both the interior and exterior of the stadium. The videos are streamed into command centers set up throughout the area nearby. Hidden monitors test the air for toxins and biological weapons, and police patrol with portable radiation detectors.

Although vehicles were subjected to x-ray scanning, there does not appear to have been naked scanners for people. But, everyone go a pat-down! And, if you watch this video, at least some football fans didn't care about this gross violation of their rights as long as it didn't take too long (which it didn't):

Why are so many okay with the feds interfering with a nominally private event? (And when will truckers stand up to the cargo scanners that are quite dangerous?)

Underbomber witness statement

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Sat, 18 Feb 2012 23:30:00 +0000

Please read this heroic statement by underbomber would-be victim, Kurt Haskell. An excerpt:

In closing I will just say that regardless of how the media and government try to shape the public perception of this case, I am convinced that Umar was given an intentionally defective bomb by a U.S. Government agent and placed on our flight without showing a passport or going through security, to stage a false terrorist attack to be used to implement various government policies.

The effect this matter has had on my life has been astounding and due to this case, I will never trust the government in any matter, ever.

In regards to sentencing, nothing I’ve said excuses the fact that Umar tried to kill me.

Media Succumbs to TSA Propaganda

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Fisher) — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 20:14:00 +0000

The press that was railing about the intrusive TSA procedures less than a year ago has seemingly taken a softer approach toward TSA in the past month, reporting frequently about improperly checked weapons, empty shotgun shells, dangerous cupcakes and loose change at checkpoints. While many of the recent TSA related mainstream media reports resemble public service announcements for the agency, crimes by TSA workers go unreported or largely ignored by the major news outlets.

In December a TSA screener at La Guardia Airport was arrested for stealing a laptop from a college student as he passed through security. TSA screener, Edwin Rosario, was for taking the computer on Dec. 19, 2011. Rosario was seen on surveillance video taking the laptop and admitted to the theft when a TSA supervisor confronted him about it at his Bronx apartment. Curiously, the incident was not reported until after the busy holiday travel season and then not in any major publication.

In another incident, a Federal Air Marshall, ironically named Adam Marshall, was arrested by the Boston police department on Dec. 10 after he allegedly argued with members of Occupy at 3:00AM, called some of them prostitutes, struck one of the organizers in the face and stole her iPhone. This is especially troubling since Air Marshalls are armed and have the power of arrest. This too went unreported and didn’t make it to internet outlets until nearly a month later.

Incidents like this occur when you have an unaccountable agency whose workers can harass passengers with impunity and come to consider themselves above the law. There were 62 TSA workers arrested in 2011, an average of one every six days and these two add to that number nearly a month after they happened.

Many agencies in Government have as many workers as TSA yet none of these has anywhere near the same level of employee criminal activity. We virtually never read of an IRS, FBI or FAA employee being arrested but this is common for TSA employees and often the crimes are particularly heinous, such as child molestation and even one murder. In many cases, investigations after their arrest reveal that these workers had past criminal records that TSA ignored or failed to discover.

TSA hiring standards state that the worker may not have had a criminal conviction in the past ten years and excludes juvenile convictions when the applicant becomes 18 even if the conviction is less than a year old. Consequently many TSA workers have past criminal histories yet are entrusted with airline security and custody of our belongings.

Now AFGE, the TSA union, is pushing the agency to give TSA screeners the power to arrest travelers whom they determine to be a threat of not complying with TSA regulations. If the union is successful in gaining more authority for already unaccountable workers, it is simply a matter of time before law-abiding travelers are being arrested by TSA screeners for failure to show proper deference to power tripping ex-convicts with a grudge against society.

Finally following their own laws

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 05:49:00 +0000

All employers have to provide dosimeters to any employers working near radioactive sources. This requirement comes from OSHA . Now the TSA is finally following the law. I'm interests to see the results, as are many scientists, since independent testing of exposure has been repeatedly blocked.

Why opting out is important

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 05:46:00 +0000

I couldn't have said it better myself. This is easier said than done for some, but if you can bear it - as my husband does - then it does help us save our freedoms and protest their loss.

TSA budget + $400,000

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 05:45:00 +0000

Because people carry change in their pocket, and this sets off alarms both in metal detector walk-throughs as well as naked scanners, airline passengers unintentionally forfeit hundreds of thousands of dollars in change each year. And the TSA, bastion of public service that it is, keeps all that loose change. Seems they should return it to the taxpayers via a refund (could just be a line-item on our 1040a, "Taxpayer money acquired at illegal checkpoints due to you") rather than put back into TSA coffers.

Oh - and how many of you think that none of the agents at the checkpoint pocket some change along the way?

Egregious violation of safety and privacy at American borders

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 05:44:00 +0000

Around the time I was warning that unseemly practices of other countries could come to the US if we weren't, Obama's DHS was purchasing the very technology that I was worried about: scanners that were capable of seeing through the metal bodies of cars and trucks. I knew that DHS has been using these for VIPR inspections of trucks, but I did not know that any had been installed at the border. They have and CNET has the story.

A Senator who stands up

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 05:43:00 +0000

Rand Paul didn't just stand up for himself. He stood up for all of us. Here's an excerpt from his father's fundraising email about the news today:

After an “anomaly” turned up in his body scan as he was trying to board a flight in Nashville, Rand showed that he was clearly no threat and asked to go through the scanner a second time.

Instead of tolerating this common-sense idea, TSA officials demanded he undergo a full body pat-down.

Rand stood up for his rights and refused – and was then detained by the TSA and prevented from getting on his flight.

Though the TSA finally caved after Rand didn't back down for two hours - and allowed him to go through the scanner again - Rand caught a later flight but missed his commitment to speak at the March for Life in Washington, D.C.

Ron Paul promises to end the TSA as President. Note that he always gets the pat-down due to a medical issue that triggers it.

UPDATE: Here's Rand Paul explaining his confrontation to CNN...

Are outbursts at the airport okay?

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 04:02:00 +0000

A friend posted the following status to her Facebook profile today:

Can't believe that some lady just made a HUGE scene and got super, visibly mad that the TSA made her throw out all her liquids over the allowed size. She even admitted that she knew about the rule, but said they had always "let it go" before.

She later updated to say the woman was still complaining loudly in the boarding area. I responded in a comment to her, but it led to a rash of ideas that I wanted to elaborate on.

I am sympathetic to both sides here. Let's face it: flying sucks. Many people are in a rush. They don't want some moron - or someone with a protest agenda - holding them up. Frequent fliers are oftentimes just commuting. They want to get this mundane part of their day over with. Get to the gate or on the plane and get settled in so something productive can be done. Occasional fliers are often flustered by all of the rules. They are aware that they are the hold-up in the line and don't want to inconvenience others, but are also understandably confused by the process.

It's quite obvious that the TSA, at a minimum, exacerbates and, in some cases, even creates these problems. Before I elaborate, I want to relate a story that occurred to my family (my sisters and parents) and posit that something like this may have occurred to the lady making a scene in front of my friend. It will also tie into some issues that the TSA can take the blame for.

All of my family members have flown before, and since 9/11, but they are all infrequent fliers. Between the four of them, there was probably an average of one round-trip air travel a year. They were traveling to a wedding. As many women know, traveling to a wedding under 3-1-1 rules (the really dumb TSA rules where all liquids must fit in 3-oz bottles stuffed into a single Ziploc bag) pretty much eliminates the possibility of traveling with carry-on luggage only (no checked bags). Even under regular circumstances, it's hard to fit all hair products and makeup that have a liquid or gel consistency into a single bag. But you can forego your favorite lip gloss, use hotel shampoo, skip the perfume, use a travel size hair product that is not your usual brand, etc... on a regular trip. When a woman goes to a wedding (or similar event), she will not want to leave her beauty to chance. So the full-size bottles of hair product and all of the make-up required will have to go in checked luggage.

That's a long lead-in to tell you that my older sister had over a hundred dollars worth of hair and makeup products in a suitcase for this trip. The flight was delayed and they all left from my parents' house - a mere 20 minute drive to the airport - with plenty of time to catch the flight. But, when they arrived, they found themselves standing in a very long check-in line. When they got to the counter, they were told it was too late to check the bags. When they got to security, my sister was forced to throw away most of her products (they took pity on her and let her keep some). My sister is mild-mannered, and my family is not one to make a scene. So, I'm certain that there was no yelling and screaming at the security checkpoint or at the gate. But... if my sister had thrown a fit, would you really blame her (knowing this full story)? (By the way, if you knew even more about my sister's life and what a rotten year she had had and what her financial situation was, you may have even started fighting on her behalf!)

So, what does the TSA do to create or worsen all of the problems at the airport? First, checked luggage is screened, increasing the amount of time that the check-in counter must use as a cut-off for letting luggage through. Nevermind that this is a personal security risk that has led to documented and anectdotal instances of theft. Not all airports are equipped with the most efficient screening equipment and flow processes, so it is likely that in certain airports the cut-off for luggage may be much longer than at other airports.

TSA regulations are, generally speaking, stupid. I already described the 3-1-1 rules, which everyone knows do nothing to prevent liquid explosives from getting on the plane, even assuming perfect compliance and enforcement. The shoes off, jackets off, belts off, laptops out of the bag, empty your pockets, etc... make it so that you are practically getting undressed and unpacking, but the pay-off is unclear. This is confusing for occasional travelers, and stressful for all but the most frequent travelers. If you're traveling with children, you also have to do this for your children and heft strollers and car seats onto the conveyer belt. (Children can supposedly keep their shoes on, now, though this was not the case as recently as last summer.)

TSA regulations are not consistently enforced. Case in point is my sister, who was "allowed" to keep some of her products. The lady that my friend is complaining about also states that, in the past, she has been able to get things through security. This is totally believable. I've gotten chapstick, lip gloss, and mascara through even though it wasn't in a ziplock bag. I bet many people have taken cupcakes on board a plane, but just a few weeks ago, one person (that we know of) had theirs confiscated. Many women travel with breast milk, but some get stopped and harassed.

The TSA is adding stress to an already stressful situation, putting rules in place that slow down everyone - to the irritation of frequent fliers, who wrongfully send their ire to the occasional passengers instead of the bloated agency the put the rules in place.

And let's not forget that all of the TSA searches - of checked and carry-on luggage, as well as making people partially undress - are unconstitutional. My friend is a lawyer, so she may quibble with me on how the law is interpreted in 2012. But, I can read English, and the wording in the Constitution is quite clear on this point - lawyers and judges for the last two centuries be damned:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

About a year ago, just after my last flight, a friend let me in on a great idea that I wish I had known about before I quit flying. I was an occasional flier of about 3 round-trips a year and I am a pretty empathic person. I am quite aware of how others around me might feel and I often try to limit my behavior so that others are more comfortable. At the airport, this translated into me being someone who tried to know the rules going in, followed the rules, and did so efficiently. I didn't want to be the person holding up the line. By the time I got to the front of the line, my laptop bag was already unzipped and my jacket was off. I would try to remember to wear slip on shoes. And I always, always, always, found airport security to be extremely stressful.

Then my friend told me that he had decided a number of years ago that he was going to intentionally take his time and go slowly through security. Sure, he would wave people through to go around him. But he wasn't going to let the process raise his blood pressure more than necessary. And, he saw it as a form of protest. Everyone wants you to be efficient - the TSA agents as well as the other passengers - but by going slow you are saying, "I won't be put in your mold. I know I must submit to these dumb rules or risk life and liberty, but I don't have to submit so willingly."

I don't know if the lady my friend was complaining about had a really good reason to complain, like my sister, or if maybe she was protesting in her way - "I won't go quietly..." - or perhaps she is just an obnoxious woman who likes attention. But, I'm not so quick to judge anymore, because I know who is always on the wrong side: The TSA. The passengers are always the victim, some more submissive than others, some more irritating than others, and even some more criminal than others. But they are the victims, nonetheless.

Bleg: Android and Blogger

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 20:37:00 +0000

I have a mobile Android device now (Samsung Galaxy Tab 7 Plus - love it so far!), which I hope will help me stay more current on this blog than has been possible for the last several months. But, I'm having trouble with the Blogger app, which leads me to this bleg: Do you know of any good apps for posting to blogger on Android? Please respond in the comments or email me.

(If you want to know, I can't embed links or preview posts, so I've been saving my drafts and then posting them on a PC later - hence the flurries of postings you've been seeing.)

From a police state to a military state (with help from the TSA)

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 20:31:00 +0000

Even I find this surprising. I've not been to Boston, but have been in several cities and rode on mass transit in each recently. I did not notice a police or TSA presence and did not have to undergo any warrantless searches.

TSA's successes

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 20:30:00 +0000

Straight from the horse's mouth. But, as the first commenter noted: "You will look in vain on this 'top ten' for any terrorist threat."

Excellent expose of the TSA

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 20:28:00 +0000

In Vanity Fair.

12 ideas for the TSA

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 20:28:00 +0000

I'll add one more to Chris Elliott's list: Go away, TSA!

TSA skeptic illustrates security theater

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 20:27:00 +0000

Jeff Goldberg points out that if scanners were so essential, then they'd be in more locations more quickly if the airport in question has a lot of flights to Reagan airport. Just another example of the theater.

TSA Groping Celebrities - 2011 Edition

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Fisher) — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 00:59:00 +0000

Over the past year ordinary passengers weren’t the only ones who had problems with TSA screenings. Over thirty celebrities of varying notoriety were also serially groped and humiliated, some more egregious than others.

Humorist Dave Barry was among the first to publicly describe his mistreatment by TSA. This was soon followed by another report from CBS anchor Brian Williams who described TSA’s inspection of him and “the twins” on the Dave Letterman Show. Similar reports followed by blogger Adam Carolla, and Fox financial reporter Al Lewis, some of which were quite graphic and described in detail previously too racy for publication in mainstream media.

A number of highly invasive pat downs were reported by Khloe Kardashian, who compared her pat down to being raped, actress Christine Ebersole, blogger Amy Alkon and an emotional account from Former Miss USA Susie Castillo recorded minutes after she cleared security.

Other actors were also less than happy with the invasiveness of their screening. The Wil Wheaton who reported his groping on his website and James Pitt Star Of Avatar expressed his distaste of TSA pat downs and full body scans on YouTube.

Even dignitaries have been subjected to this humiliation In December 2010, TSA screeners at BHM airport groped an Indian Diplomat at the checkpoint despite her repeated request for a private screening. She was probably fortunate that they refused or things could have been worse for her. Within days of this incident an Indian Ambassador was harassed by TSA, this time at IAH airport.

In a yet a third insult to India, Former President Kalam was frisked at JFK in November, touching off yet a diplomatic protest, since this the second time this man had been publicly frisked in a US airport.

On the national scene, Alaska State legislator and abuse victim Sharon Cissna made news when she refused a pat down after the nude scan identified her mastectomy scar as an “anomaly” that was a potential weapon. This was followed by Congressman Chuck Schumer tweeting that TSA scans and pat downs were “un-American” after he had the experience himself.

Claire McCaskill who initially described TSA pat downs as “love pats” while she still had access to a private jet, later said that her TSA pat-downs 'get ugly' now that she has to fly commercial. Even Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who was instrumental in forming TSA, was the recipient of a TSA inspection, demonstrating the unbridled stupidity of the agency.

Some resorted to Twitter to express their displeasure over their TSA experience. DWTS regular Cheryl Burke reported being ‘fingered” by a screener and Food Network star Giada De Laurentiis described a similar experience in her tweet. Former Facts of Life actress Justine Bateman booed TSA for their performance in her tweet. Actor Laz Alonso tweeted that he thinks scanners are invasive and random selections are silly.

Even sports figures have had their share of TSA encounters. Cubs Manager Mike Quade got a thorough going-over and NBA All-Star Chris Kaman reported his TSA ‘nightmare. A photographer captured Anna Kournikova's pat down and her reaction afterward. In another You Tube video former coach Mike Ditka was recorded while being inspected by a TSA screener.

Proving that people of all political persuasions are fed up with TSA, Keith Olbermann called for John Pistole’s resignation on his Op-Ed segment on Countdown. And TSA closed their list of celebrity abuses in November with Jersey Shore performer Jwoww blasting Fargo airport TSA for subjecting her to a humiliating public pat down after she cleared security and bought a cup of coffee.

The sheer number of reports, many not surprisingly occurring at LAX where the scanners still lack privacy software, makes one wonder if there is some sort of competition by screeners to see who can score the most celebrity pat downs or if they are recording them for their own entertainment. This would not be without precedent given that screeners at MCO were caught keeping a derogatory Jeopardy style scoreboard of who could harass the most gays, lesbians and blacks.

While all of these represent a violation of personal privacy and rights, none were as unfortunate as

CNN reporter Drew Griffin. He was placed on the TSA Terrorist watch list subjecting him to endless and unwarranted TSA harassment.

Some celebrities who were spared the mortification of a public pat down were perturbed at being selected for naked scans. Former Baywatch actress Donna D'Errico, complained that she was singled out for the naked scanners because of her appearance and Country singer Miranda Lambert opted out of the scanner at XXX and endured the TSA groping that ensued. Gwyneth Paltrow expressed similar feelings

Actor Laz Alonso tweeted that he thinks the scanners are invasive and random selections are silly as does Sean Penn who doesn’t like TSA X-ray, either.

If you are put off by the thought of being viewed naked by a stranger or having your nude image floating around in a government database, at least you’re not alone.

False alarm rate is alarming Europeans

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:50:00 +0000

Millimeter scanners are not only a gross violation of privacy, they are also ineffective. Of choose we knew this anecdotally from the number of people who report getting the scan-n-grope. But now the European states are coming forward with their own numbers, and the false alarm rate is about 50%.

Florida is paying attention to the naked scanner controversy

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:49:00 +0000

This is a well-researched article summarizing the controversy of the health risks of backscatter naked scanners.

The TSA Pre-Grope Program

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Fisher) — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:47:00 +0000

TSA is touting their new passenger vetting system that will allow “trusted travelers” to provide personal information in exchange for an unspecified form of expedited screening. Apparently not content to invade the physical privacy of travelers by groping and strip searching them, now they want passengers’ sensitive financial, health and personal data in exchange for what, based on their past track record, will almost certainly be an empty promise.

They have made it clear that these passengers would still be sent through scanners, would still be subject to pat downs and possibly strip searches but at least wouldn’t have to wait as long to be harassed.

Those invited to participate in this Pre-Grope program will pay TSA several hundred dollar each year, trust that TSA won’t renege on their promise and actually believe that TSA will somehow manage to keep their personal financial information secure. Presumably, there are plenty of gullible and desperate passengers willing to participate in this despite overwhelming evidence that it will ultimately fall short of expectations and almost certainly result in even more TSA inflicted damage.

They assure participants that their personal data will be secure and only be used to confirm that the passenger is not a risk. This is from the same agency that released the personal information of passengers and its own employees in 2005 and posted their own sensitive security information on the internet in 2009.

In keeping with the agency’s penchant for avoiding the truth, TSA attempted to cover up the extent of the employee data breach and the airlines’ participation in TSA’s data mining efforts.

This program will undoubtedly result in disappointed passengers, data breaches, identity thefts and more attempts by TSA to deny reality and blame the victims.

The bag search: Invasion of privacy

noreply@blogger.com (Kathryn Muratore) — Wed, 21 Dec 2011 21:09:00 +0000

But at least some TSA agents have the courtesy to leave notes, thereby making the privacy invasion both obvious and humorous (for some).