Police, TSA and other "Authorities"

[American Patriot]

I really couldn't resist posting this.

It's a picture of Janet N. talking about the "Don't touch my junk" guy I think....

Home : Traffic :


Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Regular Photo Size











DHS Chief To Visit Trenton Train Station

TRENTON, N.J. - The nation's Homeland Security chief wants people to be vigilant heading into the holiday travel season.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano will discuss the "If you see something, say something" campaign during a visit to the Trenton train station Monday.
The campaign urges Americans to report suspicious activity while traveling. It encourages the public and workers to identify and report signs of terrorism and crime to police and transit authorities.
The program began in the New York City region and has since grown. It's being trumpeted ahead of the holiday travel season.
Napolitano will be joined by U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey and New Jersey State Police Deputy Superintendent of Homeland Security Lt. Col. Jerome Hatfield.

[American Patriot]

TSA Chief Apologizes To Bladder Cancer Survivor After Excruciating Experience In Detroit

» 1 commentby Mark Joyella | 3:35 pm, November 22nd, 2010
video
The story retired teacher Thomas Sawyer tells of his experience at the hands of a TSA officer at Detroit’s airport makes you want to scream at the TSA agent and give Mr. Sawyer a hug–and now TSA Chief John Pistole has called to apologize.
Sawyer, a cancer survivor, lost his bladder and has a urostomy bag attached to his body under his clothing. When a body scanner picked up the bag at a security checkpoint, Sawyer was pulled aside for an enhanced pat down. As Sawyer recounted the story Monday on CNN’s American Morning, what happened next was avoidable–and humiliating:
“He started to talk about the pat down procedure and I said I need to tell you about my medical condition. He said, no you don’t need to tell me, and I said no, really, I have to…He proceeded just with the pat down. When he got to my chest area, he used his open palm and started going down my chest quite hard. And I knew if he got down near where my urostomy bag was, there was a possibility of pulling the seal off of it.”
Mr. Sawyer warned the TSA agent to go slow and soft at risk of tearing away the tube connected to Mr. Sawyer’s stomach, but that didn’t happen. “Once that happened, it was kind of like pulling the seal off a container of orange juice and turning it upside down,” said Sawyer, who says “one of the biggest fears of ostomy patients is having a leak in public.”
“These people need to be trained in physical conditions–and emotional conditions.”
Your heart really goes out to the guy, and then there’s this: The TSA agent, Sawyer says, never apologized–leaving the gentle retiree to clean himself up in an airport bathroom before traveling on to Orlando.
Sawyer has now received an apology–from the man in charge, who called on Monday afternoon to express his regrets.
Watch the interview, from CNN:

[American Patriot]

Screening of shirtless boy brushed off by TSA

• Share
  
  0diggsdigg
  
• Topics
• Transportation Security Administration
• Education
• Colleges and Universities
• See more topics »
  
  • X
    Utah
    
    YouTube
    

By Associated Press 3:04 p.m. CST, November 22, 2010

• E-mail
• Print
• Share
• Text Size

sns-ap-airportsearch-shirtlessboyupdate

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — The Transportation Security Administration says no complaints were filed about an incident at Salt Lake City's airport in which a father removed his young son's shirt during a security pat-down.

TSA says the boy was being searched because he sounded an alarm inside a metal detector. A college student who recorded it all says the boy appeared so shy he couldn't keep his arms raised for a pat-down. The father removed his son's shirt out of frustration despite the protest of the screener.

The college student, Luke Tait of Utah Valley University, says he tried to approach the father and son, but was stopped by a man in a dark suit who appeared to be a TSA supervisor. Tait says he was grilled about his motives.

---

Get weather and breaking news alerts on your cell phone >>

---

The video was posted on YouTube.

Utah congressman Jason Chaffetz, an outspoken critic of TSA screening methods, is demanding an investigation of the incident.



YouTube video: http://tinyurl.com/328gv7q

[Backstop]

TSA Chief Apologizes To Bladder Cancer Survivor After Excruciating Experience In Detroit

You know what TSA Chief John Pistole?

I got shit in one hand, and your apology in the other.

And I can't figure out which one stinks more.

Your organization is in complete violation of the 4th Amendment, and you need to stop.

[Backstop]

If they make Muslims exempt, they won't be able to contain the outrage.

[Malsua]

Case in point: newly-appointed Speaker of the House John Boehner.

The man often travels domestically with other passengers, but gets to bypass TSA security and go directly to the gate. Sure, the man likely isn’t planning to cause harm, but still, should he not be expected to endure the checks the rest of us must?

I'm less of a risk than the incoming speaker. I should get a pass. I say less because a crafty muslim terrorist might target his airplane because of who he is and in my case no muslim terrorist would bother. The chances of either of us actively attempting to hijack or blow up an airplane is identical. Zero. I want a free pass.

[Malsua]

“Instead of making this Wednesday National Opt-Out Day in which a bunch of self-appointed guardians of liberty slow down the line for everyone by asking for pat-downs,” said Baker, “maybe what we need is a day when everyone who goes through the line says, ‘Thanks for what you do.’ ”

How about NO? If these generally unemployable TSA workers would refuse to do these unconstitutional searches, perhaps the whole shittery would just fall apart. We need to make EVERYONE involved in these rights violations as uncomfortable as possible.

[vector7]

TSA workers face verbal abuse from travelers

Union that represents airport screeners urges agency to protect employees

Airline passengers aren’t the only ones complaining about the Transportation Security Administration’s new enhanced security procedures. Many TSA employees aren’t too happy, either.

The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), the union that represents TSA workers, is urging the TSA to do more to protect its employees from abuse from airline passengers angry over the new security methods. The union reports that some members “have reported instances in which passengers have become angry, belligerent and even physical with TSOs (transportation security officers). In Indianapolis, for example, a TSO was punched by a passenger who didn’t like the new screening process,” the union said in a Nov. 17 statement posted on its website.

1. Related coverage
   
   1. 
      AP
      Fed-up fliers protest airport security measures For 30 years, Marcia Miller has flown to Toledo, Ohio, to join four generations of her family for Thanksgiving. But this year, thanks to new airport security measures, she's opting to stay home. Full story
   2. Lessons learned from 'Planes, Trains and Automobiles'
   3. Road work may slow your holiday road trip
   4. Tactical Thanksgiving: holiday travel game plan
   5. Hefty surcharges a new holiday travel tradition
   6. Holiday travel 2010: what you need to know
   
   

Union President John Gage called on TSA to provide an educational pamphlet to each passenger describing both their rights and the details of the new procedures, which include full-body scans and enhanced pat-downs.

Video: Counterterrorism expert defends use of pat-downs (on this page) “This absence of information has resulted in a backlash against the character and professionalism of TSOs,” said Gage in a statement. “TSA must act now — before the Thanksgiving rush — to ensure that TSOs are not being left to fend for themselves.”

“Our concern is that the public not confuse the people implementing the policies with the people who developed the policies,” said Sharon Pinnock, the union's director of membership and organization.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Monday the government will take into account the public's concerns and complaints as it evaluates airport security measures. He says TSA procedures will continue to evolve.

Story: TSA chief apologizes to traveler with ostomy
Some travelers have vowed to disrupt airport security Wednesday in a protest timed for the busiest travel day of the year, as millions of Americans fly off for annual family feasts.

“TSOs are trained security professionals,” Pinnock said. “Despite this call for chaos and disruption, it’s our belief that our members and people we represent will respond as the security professionals that they are.”

Valyria Lewis, local president of AFGE Local 555, which represents TSA screeners in Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina, said TSOs are trained to screen passengers who opt out of full-body scans.

“But we’d like TSA to hand out pamphlets detailing what opt out means.

When someone opts out of the X-ray scanners, they’re opting in for the pat-down,” Lewis said. “And once we explain what the pat-down is, you can’t go back and change your mind and say ‘OK, I’ll go through the scanner.’ We’d like that explained so officers aren’t caught in that crossfire.”

The National Treasury Employees Union, the largest independent federal union, has launched a campaign in support of the TSA to educate the public about the critical role played by TSA officers in helping secure the safety of air travel.

“We stand by them this holiday season and ask the American public to stand by them as well and respect the difficult job they perform to protect our skies and our country,” said NTEU President Colleen M. Kelley in a statement.

Complaints of verbal abuse

Full-body scanners are now in place at close to 70 airports and send virtually naked images of passengers to a TSA screener at a remote location. Those who wish to avoid the scanners must instead undergo a new, open-palmed pat-down that many travelers, and even some security officers, feel is too personally invasive.

Aviation and security blogger Steven Frischling said he has received comments from TSA front-line screeners complaining of verbal abuse.
“Molester, pervert, disgusting, an embarrassment, creep. These are all words I have heard today at work describing me. ...These comments are painful and demoralizing,” one unnamed TSO posted on Frischling’s website.

Another said: “Being a TSO means often being verbally abused. You let the comments roll off and check the next person; however, when a woman refuses the scanner then comes to me and tells me that she feels like I am molesting her; that is beyond verbal abuse.”

“I have encountered a few TSA transportation security officers that have the ‘We're keeping people safe’ attitude,” said Frischling, “But when you ask them about specific aspects of the TSA's policy or procedure, they backpedal a bit and admit there are problems.”

Interactive: Airport Security (on this page) TSA chief John Pistole said Monday on NBC’s TODAY show that the agency is reviewing its passenger screening methods to ensure they are as minimally invasive as possible. "We're going to look at how can we do the most effective screening in the least invasive way knowing that there's always a trade-off between security and privacy," Pistole said.

Pistole noted that those getting body searches constitute "a very small percent" of the 34 million people who have flown since the new policy went into effect.

“Obviously our work force has received the brunt of the frustration from passengers but seem to be dealing with it quite well, as they have been reassured they are doing a critical job at a critical time,” said TSA spokesman Nico Melendez. He added that TSA employees are prohibited from talking to the media “without prior approval.”

“The thing to keep in mind is that stress affects screeners as much as it does travelers,” said Tom Murphy, director of the Human Resiliency Institute at Fordham University. Murphy has provided customer-service training to screeners at many U.S. airports. “While senior government officials explore how to achieve optimum security in less intrusive, and therefore less stressful, ways my recommendation to travelers is to try to see this from the screeners’ point of view.”

A stressful job

Guy Winch, an expert on the psychology of complaining and customer service and the author of a forthcoming book, “The Squeaky Wheel,” is concerned with the stress levels TSA employees may be experiencing this week on the job.

He explains that the “emotional labor” TSA workers must do — “processing people regardless of hostile exchanges … and looking for explosives and weapons” — makes the stakes for performing their duties correctly “as high as they get.” Winch says the best thing TSA administrators can do for employees doing enhanced pat-downs is to provide an extra layer of managerial and supervisory support. “They need to convey the message that superiors are aware of the stresses the employees are under and are there to support them.”

Winch says having a mental health professional on staff or available as a referral “can be crucial in helping the people who did not make these rules but are charged with enforcing and implementing them nonetheless.”

Stewart Baker, who worked at the Department of Homeland Security as its first secretary of policy under President George W. Bush, suspects the new security protocols and the aggressive reaction of some passengers is hurting TSA morale.

“TSA has made a lot of progress in training its officers to be professional even in the face of unhappy passengers, but the latest protocols — and press coverage of the most inflammatory stories — have led to a much higher level of hostility,” said Baker.

“Instead of making this Wednesday National Opt-Out Day in which a bunch of self-appointed guardians of liberty slow down the line for everyone by asking for pat-downs,” said Baker, “maybe what we need is a day when everyone who goes through the line says, ‘Thanks for what you do.’ ”

[Backstop]

Another said: “Being a TSO means often being verbally abused. You let the comments roll off and check the next person; however, when a woman refuses the scanner then comes to me and tells me that she feels like I am molesting her; that is beyond verbal abuse.

This is so fucked up it's ridiculous.

Woman: your pat down makes me feel like you're molesting me.

TSA Goon: that is beyond verbal abuse.

The world has truly gone topsy turvy.

[AGEUSAF]

I was planning on flying this winter. If this farce remains, I plan on taking a Viagra before I get checked out at least LOL. Maybe even an adult diaper and load that baby up.

[Backstop]

TSA Goon: Excuse me sir. Is that a bomb in your pants, or are you just happy to see me?

[American Patriot]

LMAO...

"...load that baby up..."

ROTFLMAO!

[Malsua]

This guy went about it the right way. He also recorded all the audio.

Good man. One thing cops know about is Miranda rights. When asked "Am I being Detained" they had to either Mirandize him and answer yes or let him go. By asking this particular question, he framed their response, corning them into action or no action. Since they had no cause to proceed since the TSA wouldn't commit, they just stood their and were actually very professional about the whole thing.


----------------------
http://noblasters.com/post/1650102322/my-tsa-encounter

My TSA Encounter

“You don’t need to see his identification.”
On November 21, 2010, I was allowed to enter the U.S. through an airport security checkpoint without being x-rayed or touched by a TSA officer. This post explains how.

Edit: Minor edits for clarity. I have uploaded the audio and it is available here.

This past Sunday, I was returning from a trip to Europe. I flew from Paris to Cincinnati, landing in Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport.
As I got off my flight, I did all of the things that are normally requested from U.S. citizens returning from abroad. I filled out the customs declarations, confirmed that I hadn’t set foot on any farmland, and answered questions about the chocolates that I had purchased in Switzerland. While I don’t believe that these questions are necessary, I don’t mind answering them if it means some added security. They aren’t particularly intrusive. My passport was stamped, and I moved through customs a happy citizen returning home.

But wait – here was a second line to wait in.

This new line led to a TSA security checkpoint. You see, it is official TSA policy that people (both citizens and non-citizens alike) from international flights are screened as they enter the airport, despite the fact that they have already flown. Even before the new controversial security measures were put in place, I found this practice annoying. But now, as I looked past the 25 people waiting to get into their own country, I saw it: the dreaded Backscatter imaging machine.

Now, I’ve read a fair amount about the controversy surrounding the new TSA policies. I certainly don’t enjoy being treated like a terrorist in my own country, but I’m also not a die-hard constitutional rights advocate. However, for some reason, I was irked. Maybe it was the video of the 3-year old getting molested, maybe it was the sexual assault victim having to cry her way through getting groped, maybe it was the father watching teenage TSA officers joke about his attractive daughter. Whatever it was, this issue didn’t sit right with me. We shouldn’t be required to do this simply to get into our own country.

So, since I had nobody waiting for me at home and no connecting flight to catch, I had some free time. I decided to test my rights.

After putting all my stuff through the x-ray, I was asked to go through the Backscatter. I politely said that I didn’t want to. The technician quipped to his colleague, “We’ve got an opt-out.” They laughed. He turned back and started to explain.

After he finished, I said, “I understand what the pat-down entails, but I wanted to let you know that I do not give you permission to touch my genitals or the surrounding area. If you do, I will consider it assault.”
He called his manager over, who again informed me of the policy. Throughout this event, this happened quite a few times. After raising my concerns regarding the policy to an officer, they often simply quoted back the policy. For the sake of brevity, I will simply say “Policy restatement.”
I said, “I am aware that it is policy, but I disagree with the policy, and I think that it is unconstitutional. As a U.S. citizen, I have the right to move freely within my country as long as I can demonstrate proof of citizenship and have demonstrated no reasonable cause to be detained.”

Policy restatement. “You have two options – the Backscatter or the pat down. It is your choice, but those are the only ways you can go through security.”

I asked if I could speak to his manager.
“I’m the supervisor here.”
“Do you have a manager?”
“Yes, but he’s very far away at the moment. And he’ll say the same thing I am.” Policy restatement.

At this point, I took out my iPhone, activated the voice recorder, and asked The Supervisor, “Per my constitutional rights, I am not allowed to be detained without reasonable cause for arrest. Now, am I free to go?”
He answered, “If you leave, we will call the APD.”

I asked, “Who is the APD?”

“The Airport Police Department.”

I said, “Actually, that’s probably a good idea. Let’s call them and your manager.”

The Supervisor turned and walked away without saying anything. I stood and waited, chatting to The Technician about how they aren’t allowed to wear radiation badges, even though they work with radiation equipment. He said, “I think I’m a couple steps ahead of you regarding looking out for my own health.”

I stood and waited for 20 minutes. Two cops showed up. Big ones. I admit, I did not want to be handcuffed by these guys.

One cop was older than the other, but they were still clearly partners. Neither of them took the lead on answering my questions, and neither of them told the other what to do. They came over to me and asked me to explain the issue. I first showed them the iPhone. After I explained my position, they restated the policy to me.

I said, “Yes sir. I understand the policy, but I still disagree and I still don’t think that I can be made to do these searches in order to go home. Now am I free to go?”

They didn’t answer.

I repeated the question. “Since you are actual police officers and not simply TSA, I am sure you have had much more training on my rights as a U.S. citizen, so you understand what is at stake here. So, am I free to go? Or am I being detained?”

Young Cop answers, “You aren’t being detained, but you can’t go through there.”

“Isn’t that what detaining is? Preventing me from leaving?”

“You can leave if you want, but it has to be that direction.” He points back towards customs. Young Cop asks, “Why are you doing this?”

I explain that I’m worried that the Backscatter has unproven health risks. And that for all he knows, I might be a sexual assault victim and don’t feel like being touched. I say that the policy is needlessly invasive and it doesn’t provide any added security.

He asks, “But didn’t you go through this when you left on your flight?”
“Yes,” I say, grinning, “But I didn’t want to miss my flight then.”

The cops leave, and I stand around and wait some more. It should be noted that throughout this time, no fewer than 10 TSA officers and technicians are standing around, watching me. I was literally the only one still waiting to go through security.

The cops, The TSA Supervisor, and another guy were standing behind the checkpoint deliberating about something. I explained this to my iPhone and The Supervisor shouted, “Does that thing have video?”

“No sir. Just audio.” I was telling the truth – I’m still on an iPhone 3G.
After a while, Young Cop comes and asks me for my papers. My passport, my boarding pass, my driver’s license, and even a business card. I give him everything except the business card. He told me that he was just gathering information for the police report, which is standard procedure. I complied – I knew that this was indeed standard.

He left, and a Delta Airlines manager comes over and starts talking to me. He is clearly acting as a mediator. He asks what I would consent to, if given my options. I explain that I want the least intrusive possible solution that is required. I say, “I will not do anything that is not explicitly stated on recording as mandatory.” He leaves.

Let me pause and clarify the actors’ moods here, because they will soon start to change:

• The Supervisor: Very standoffish. Sticking to policy, no exceptions.
• The TSA Officials: Mainly amused. Not very concerned otherwise.
• The Cops: Impartial observers and consultants. Possibly a bit frustrated that I’m creating the troubles, but being very professional and respectful regardless.
• The Delta Supervisor: Trying to help me see the light. He doesn’t mind the work - he’s here all day anyway, so he’d rather spend it ensuring that his customer is happy.

After another wait, Old Cop returns, and asks me what I want. I tell him, “I want to go home without going through the Backscatter and without having my genitals touched. Those are my only two conditions. I will strip naked here if that is what it takes, but I don’t want to be touched.”

He offers as an alternative, “What if we were to escort you out with us? It would involve a pat-down, but it would be us doing it instead.”
“Would you touch my balls?”

“I don’t want to touch your – genital region, but my hand might brush against it.”

I clarify, “Well, like I said, I’ll do whatever you say is mandatory. If you tell me that you have to touch my balls—“

“—I said no such thing. You’re putting words in my mouth.”

“OK. I apologize. If you say that a pat-down is mandatory, and that as a condition of that pat-down, I may have my genitals brushed against by your hand, even though you don’t want to, I will do that. But only if you say it is mandatory.”

“I’m not going to say that.”

“OK. So am I free to go?”

“You are free to go in that direction.” He points back towards customs. Then he walks away to commune with the others.

My iPhone is running out of battery, so I take out my laptop, sit in a corner, and plug it in. I have some work to do anyway, so I pull up Excel and start chugging away for about 20 minutes.

This is where the turning point happens.

The cops come back and start talking with me. Again, they are asking why I’m doing it, don’t I have a connection to make, etc. They are acting more curious at this point – no longer trying to find a contradiction in my logic.
I eventually ask what would happen if I got up and left, and just walked through security. They shrugged. “We wouldn’t do anything on our own. We are only acting on behalf of the TSA. They are in charge of this area.”
“So if he told you to arrest me, you would? And if he didn’t, you wouldn’t?”
“That’s right,” Young Cop says.

“OK well then I think it is best if we all talk together as a group now. Can you call them over?”

The Supervisor returns, along with the Delta Manager. The Supervisor is quite visibly frustrated.

I explain, “The police have explained to me that it is your call on whether or not I am being detained. If I walked through that metal detector right now, you would have to ask them to arrest me in order for them to do anything.”

He starts to defer responsibility to the officers. They emphasize that no – they have no issue with me and they are only acting on his behalf. It is his jurisdiction. It is policy. They won’t detain me unless he tells them to.
So I emphasize the iPhone again, and ask,” So, if I were to get up, walk through the metal detector, and not have it go off, would you still have them arrest me?”

The Supervisor answers, “I can’t answer that question. That is no longer an option because you were selected for the Backscatter.”

“Well you can answer the question because it is a yes or no question. If I got up and left, would you have them arrest me?”

“I can’t answer that question.”

The moods have changed. The cops are now frustrated with him because he’s pawning off his decision-making responsibility to them. He’s stopping what is clearly a logical solution to the problem. Meanwhile, the Supervisor is just growing more and more furious with me.

In another deferment of responsibility (which he probably thought was an intimidation factor), “Well then I guess I’m just going to have to call the FSD.”

Unphased, I ask, “What’s the FSD?”

“The Federal Security Director.” And he walks away.

I can see him talking on the phone to the FSD – a man apparently named Paul – and I can only catch parts of the conversation:

• “No, he’s been perfectly polite…”
• “We tried that…”
• “All he said was … Constitutional rights”

He walks over to Old Cop and hands him the phone. I can hear similar sound bites. They hang up, deliberate some more, and then wait some more.
Meanwhile, I’m typing away on my computer. Answering emails, working on my Excel model – things that I would have done at home regardless.
The Supervisor walks over and stands uncomfortably close to me. After typing for a bit more, I look up. His voice shakes, “I don’t know if I ever introduced myself.” He pulls out his badge. “My name is XXX XXX. Here is my badge. Now, I’ve shown you my credentials.”

Ah – he’s gotten the Miranda talk. I hide my smile.

“Here’s what we’re going to do. I’m going to escort you out of the terminal to the public area. You are to stay with me at all times. Do you understand?”

“Will I be touched?”

“I can’t guarantee that, but I am going to escort you out.”

“OK. I will do this. But I will restate that I still do not give you permission to touch my genitals or the surrounding area. If you do, I will still consider it assault.”

“I understand.”

And then came the most ridiculous scene of which I’ve ever been a part. I gather my things – jacket, scarf, hat, briefcase, chocolates. We walk over to the staff entrance and he scans his badge to let me through. We walk down the long hallway that led back to the baggage claim area. We skip the escalators and moving walkways. As we walk, there are TSA officials stationed at apparent checkpoints along the route. As we pass them, they form part of the circle that is around me. By the end of the walk, I count 13 TSA officials and 2 uniformed police officers forming a circle around me. We reach the baggage claim area, and everyone stops at the orange line. The Supervisor grunts, “Have a nice day,” and leaves.

In order to enter the USA, I was never touched, I was never “Backscatted,” and I was never metal detected. In the end, it took 2.5 hours, but I proved that it is possible. I’m looking forward to my next flight on Wednesday.

You can email Matt here.

[vector7]

TSA employee accused of kidnap, assault

From staff reportsLa Grange News

6 hrs ago | 87142 views | 8 |

A TSA employee remained hospitalized today after being accused of kidnapping a young female in Atlanta, then taking her to his Hogansville residence and sexually assaulting her.

Randall Scott King, whose age and street address were not given, abducted the woman Wednesday evening from a MARTA parking lot at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, police said.

The alleged victim said after the assault, she was released by her captor, who gave her a suicide note and instructions on where to deliver it.

Union City police alerted Hogansville police about the incident early Thursday.

Hogansville officers obtained search warrants and found King at his residence with what appeared to be self-inflicted wounds. Police did not describe the type or extent of his wounds. King was airlifted to Columbus Regional Medical Center, where he was listed in critical condition this morning.

Criminal warrants against King were obtained by MARTA and Hogansville police. The charges were not specified.

King was identified as an employee of the federal Transportation Safety Administration, which is assisting in the investigation.

Hogansville police said the investigation is ongoing and further details will be released when the probe is completed.

[Backstop]

This guy went about it the right way. He also recorded all the audio.

Interesting.

But I'm doubtful that outcome would be the same at other terminals.

[Malsua]

He was leaving security. In that particular airport inbound international requires that you go back into a secure area before you exit out to baggage claim.

If I had the time, in a similar situation, I would consider doing the same thing. My issue is, I NEVER have the time to do such a thing. I almost always have someone waiting for me at the other end of my journey since I travel for business.

I'm not entirely confident that my balls are sufficiently brassy either. I'd like to think they are but I might be tempted to fold after a bit. Hard to say. If I get it my head that I'm gonna "do it", I'm in it to win it. If it's a target of opportunity, I'd consider doing something until it starts to infringe on whatever else I'm doing.

Kudos to this guy. Of course, he's probably in a DHS database now as a "resistor" and might find he's pulled over for secondary scrutiny EVERY time now.

[vector7]

White House: Terrorists Have Discussed Use of Prosthetics to Conceal Explosives

TSA Under Fire for New Security Procedures, Administrator John Pistole Says Agency May Rethink Protocols



U.S. intelligence has picked up terrorists discussing the use of prosthetic or medical devices to conceal explosives, sources tell ABC News. The revelation about the intelligence, which is not new but relevant to debate over new security measures at airports, comes as the White House today acknowledged that the implementation of the security procedures has not gone perfectly.

Americans by a 2-to-1 margin support the use of naked image full-body x-ray scanners in airport security lines, but fewer than half back aggressive new pat-down procedures, according to a new ABC News/Washington Post poll. Opposition to both rises among those who fly with any frequency.

The Transportation Security Administration has come under fire for new body scanners and what some say are highly invasive pat-downs.

Thomas Sawyer, a bladder cancer survivor, said he was humiliated after a pat-down broke his urostomy bag, leaving the 61-year-old covered in his own urine. Sawyer said he warned the TSA officials twice that the pat-down could break the seal.

Cathy Bossi, a long-time flight attendant and breast cancer survivor, said the TSA made her take off her prosthetic breast.

"She put her full hand on my breast and said, 'What is this?' I said 'It's a prosthesis because I've had a breast cancer,'" Bossi said. "And she said, 'You'll need to show me that.'"

In recent days, several passengers have come forward to tell such shocking stories about their experiences with TSA officers.

An ABC News employee said she was subject to a "demeaning" search at Newark Liberty International Airport Sunday morning.

"The woman who checked me reached her hands inside my underwear and felt her way around," she said. "It was basically worse than going to the gynecologist. It was embarrassing. It was demeaning. It was inappropriate."

The head of the Transportation Security Administration John Pistole today said that at least one airport passenger screening went too far when an officer reached inside a traveler's underwear, and said the agency is open to rethinking current protocols.

That search was against protocols and "never" should have happened, TSA administrator Pistole told "Good Morning America" today.

"There should never be a situation where that happens," Pistole said. "The security officers are there to protect the traveling public. There are specific standard operating protocols, which they are to follow."

Pistole, responding to complaints from passengers, has said the TSA would not change its pat-down procedures but today said the agency was "open" to changing security procedures.

"The bottom line is, we are always adapting and adjusting prior protocols in view of the intelligence and in view of the latest information we have on how the terrorists are trying to kill our people on planes," Pistole said. "If that means we need to adjust the procedures, then of course we're open to that."

Only a small number of travelers have been subject to pat-downs, officials say. The White House says roughly 340,000 people -- or 1 percent of all travelers -- have been subjected to more intense searches since the new TSA procedures began Nov. 1.

Pistole said the key to travel security is finding the proper balance between protecting against very real threats -- such as the failed cargo bomb plot and the current search for two suicide bombers believed to be at large in Germany -- and protecting individual privacy, something that some passengers claim invasive pat-down procedures have taken away.

A video of a father taking his young son's shirt off so he can be searched has gone viral online with nearly half a million views in three days. The TSA today released a statement saying that it was the boy's father who chose to remove his shirt "in an effort to expedite the screening" and pointed out that no complaint was filed.

Passengers aren't the only ones calling for a new look at security procedures.

TSA screeners are also fed up with the blame being leveled at them and agree that a better system is needed, according to travel blogger Steven Frischling, who spoke to 20 officers about the new procedures and pat downs.

"The frontline people have significant problems with it," he said. "They feel they are handing suggestions up the chain and they're simply not being listened to."

The screeners told Frischling about their discomfort at touching people's private parts, and getting verbally abused by some passengers.

"I was asked by some guy if I got excited touching scrotums at the airport, and if it gave me a power thrill. I felt like vomiting when he asked that," said one officer. "This is not a turnon for me to touch him -- it is in fact a huge turnoff. There is a big difference between how I pat passengers down and a molester molesting people."

The TSA has attempted to downplay the actual number of people who get pat downs, although Pistole today admitted that he'd dropped the ball when it came to informing the public on what it should expect.

"I wish I could say somebody else was responsible for that, but that was my decision, and it was a risk-based decision," Pistole said at a breakfast with reporters hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. "My concern was because we piloted the new pat downs anyway in two airports, Las Vegas and Boston, that we not publicize that because it would then provide a roadmap or a blueprint to a putative terrorist, who may say OK, I know there's 453 airports around the country."

There's also concern about possible health risks stemming from the new scanners, a fear that the White House today said is unfounded.

"The truth is, you have greater [radiation] exposure sitting in an airplane than you do going through one of those machines," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said today.

The new scanners and pat downs were introduced Nov. 1, but their impact will be felt the most this week, the busiest travel period of the year.

'Opting Out' Protest to Cause Travel Gridlock?

Geoff Freeman with the U.S. Travel Association said the new procedures have prompted an important debate about what passengers would do for the sake of national safety.

"For the first time in a post 9/11 environment, travelers are now saying they're willing to discuss risk, they're willing to discuss tradeoffs; that's the discussion we need to have," he said.

A grassroots Internet campaign to encourage travelers to "opt out" of the full-body scans on Wednesday, the busiest travel day of the year, has officials fretting over a possible travel gridlock.

"I think there is potential there. That would be potentially complicated by a group of people protesting," Pistole said. "If there are no protests, then obviously we'll have just the normal crush of holiday travelers."

Though thousands of Facebook users have said they've vowed to opt out, some say the movement may be overstated and overblown.

"The truth is, most travelers just want to get to their destination as fast as possible," said Genevieve Shaw Brown, senior editor at Travelocity.

Across the nation, there are 385 of the new, full-body scanners at airports, but there are a total of 2,100 security lanes.

That means about 80 percent of security lanes won't have the machines in place.

"Most people will go through business as usual. The metal detector that we've all become used to, taking off the shoes, pouring our liquids in to the tiny little containers, business as usual for the vast majority of people,"
Brown said.

[vector7]

Muslim Women Not Required to Lift Veil, Prove ID at Canadian Airports


Even male criminals have escaped by hiding behind the veil // Source: about.com

Canadian airport security personnel do not ask veiled Muslims women to lift their veils, show and ID, and prove their identity; the veiled women do not even interact with security personnel: rather, a man traveling with the women typically hands in all the passports and is the only one to communicate with airline staff while the veiled women simply walk through, unchecked and unidentified; a video showing two veiled women walking unchecked through security at Montreal's Trudeau International Airport causes outrage in Canada

Frequent flyers know the drill well: take off your shoes, surrender your tweezers, and pack your shampoo in those little plastic baggies before lining up for the naked body scanners. How about lifting your niqab?

Apparently not.

The Toronto Sun’s Brian Lilley and Bryn Weese write that neither airlines nor security services are asking Muslim women to lift their veils and prove that the face beneath matches their photo ID.

The issue came to light through a video taken by Mick Flynn of Bradford, England. Flynn was boarding a flight at Montreal’s Trudeau International Airport when he witnessed two women with their faces covered board an Air Canada Heathrow-bound flight without being asked to remove their veils.

In fact, in the video that Flynn has posted online, a man traveling with the women hands in all the passports and is the only one to interact with airline staff while two veiled women simply walk through.

“I complained at the desk — and again as I boarded the plane — asking if the pilot was happy that two women boarded without being identified,” Flynn told QMI News Agency. “Both members of staff whom I spoke to were flustered and clearly embarrassed.”

Lilley and Bryn Weese write that Flynn’s communication with Air Canada and his video posting have resulted in a threatened lawsuit from the airline. As for answers from the company about security procedures, their response reveals holes in Canada’s air security.

“Airline passengers have already undergone multiple security checks before arriving at the boarding gate,” Air Canada spokesman Peter Fitzpatrick told QMI. “A final check is made at the gate prior to boarding in order to confirm passengers on the flight.”

Air Canada says it is capable of checking identification in a private room away from the check-in counter, but said the real responsibility for security measures lies with CATSA, the Canadian Air Transport Security Agency.
CATSA. disagrees. Greg MacDougall, a spokesman for CATSA, told QMI that their guards are primarily looking for metal, weapons, or other banned material, not ensuring that veiled faces match passport photos. “We don’t have concerns with that. We have concerns with the fact if the person has any metal under their clothing,” MacDougall said.

A former CATSA employee, who, until recently worked as a frontline screener, tells QMI: “We were never allowed to ask anyone with a veil to lift it. It is their religion.”

Frontline workers for several airlines say that any checks, if they happen at all, would likely happen at the check-in desk, not at boarding or security.

Most airports, however, have wide gaps between where baggage is checked and the secure portions of the airport. Transport Canada says there should be no confusion: “The airline must be able to verify the identity of all passengers before they are allowed to board,” the department said in a written statement.

Lawyer David Harris of INSIGNIS Strategic Research says Canadians should be concerned about what he deems preferential treatment. “Full veiling has been a boon for those participating in criminal and terrorist operations,” Harris said pointing to the story of Mustaf Jama.

Jama, a Somali national with a long criminal record, was wanted in Britain for the 2006 murder of police constable Sharon Beshenivsky. As police closed in to arrest the career criminal, Jama was able to escape back to Somalia by wearing a full veil and boarding a flight at Heathrow airport.

Harris’s call for lifting the veil is backed up by two Muslim groups often at odds with each other, the Muslim Canadian Congress and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Canada.

“You cannot allow a person wearing a mask to be in the perimeter of an airport,” says Tarek Fatah of the Congress. “If you don’t want to take off the mask, take the TTC (public transit) to Cairo.”

“Women who wear the niqab are not constrained by the religious belief from removing their veil for legitimate reasons, and security is one of them,” said Ihsaan Gardee, executive director of CAIR-CAN.

Gardee admits that Canadian officials may be reluctant to deal with this issue head-on due to concerns about political correctness. “It’s something that needs to be addressed,” Gardee said.

Gardee says it would be preferable if female staff were able to conduct any screening that involved removing the veil but adds that if female staff are not available, the women must still be forced to remove their niqab.

[vector7]

When the Obama Administration took over in January 2009 his DHS team quietly began writing their new terror threat assessment documents re-directing the war on terror to domestic right wing extremism threats.

The Fort Hood Shooter Nidal Hasan, is alleged to be apart of Obama's "transition team" on the DHS task force.

In March of 2009 the MIAC Report surfaced.

In early April 2009 Obama Bans Terms "Islam" and "Jihad" From National Security Strategy Documents.

In April 2009 the FBI begins 3-month long hiring blitz in 21 States, DC including Puerto Rico focusing on filling new roles in the field with Islamic Muslims. This was followed by the official release of the 2nd DHS Domestic Extremist Report in the same month.

In May 2009 Obama Calls Halt To Bush 'War On Terror'.
In July 2009 Obama Appoints 2 Devout Muslims to Homeland Security Posts.

In October 2010 Obama swears in another radical Muslim to Homeland Security Post

DHS & TSA: Making a list, checking it twice

By Doug Hagmann

Following the publication of my article titled “Gate Rape of America,” I was contacted by a source within the DHS who is troubled by the terminology and content of an internal memo reportedly issued yesterday at the hand of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano. Indeed, both the terminology and content contained in the document are troubling. The dissemination of the document itself is restricted by virtue of its classification, which prohibits any manner of public release. While the document cannot be posted or published, the more salient points are revealed here.

The memo, which actually takes the form of an administrative directive, appears to be the product of undated but recent high level meetings between Napolitano, John Pistole, head of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA),and one or more of Obama’s national security advisors.

This document officially addresses those who are opposed to, or engaged in the disruption of the implementation of the enhanced airport screening procedures as “domestic extremists.”

The introductory paragraph of the multi-page document states that it is issued “in response to the growing public backlash against enhanced TSA security screening procedures and the agents conducting the screening process.” Implicit within the same section is that the recently enhanced security screening procedures implemented at U.S. airports, and the measures to be taken in response to the negative public backlash as detailed [in this directive], have the full support of the President. In other words, Obama not only endorses the enhanced security screening, but the measures outlined in this directive to be taken in response to public objections.

The terminology contained within the reported memo is indeed troubling. It labels any person who “interferes” with TSA airport security screening procedure protocol and operations by actively objecting to the established screening process, “including but not limited to the anticipated national opt-out day” as a “domestic extremist.” The label is then broadened to include “any person, group or alternative media source” that actively objects to, causes others to object to, supports and/or elicits support for anyone who engages in such travel disruptions at U.S. airports in response to the enhanced security procedures.

For individuals who engaged in such activity at screening points, it instructs TSA operations to obtain the identities of those individuals and other applicable information and submit the same electronically to the Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division, the Extremism and Radicalization branch of the Office of Intelligence & Analysis (IA) division of the Department of Homeland Security.

For “any person, group or domestic alternative media source” that actively objects to, causes others to object to, supports and/or elicits support for anyone who engages in such travel “disruptions” at U.S. airports (as defined above) in response to the enhanced security procedures, the [applicable DHS administrative branch] is instructed to identify and collect information about the persons or entities, and submit such information in the manner outlined [within this directive].

It would appear that the Department of Homeland Security is not only prepared to enforce the enhanced security procedures at airports, but is involved in gathering intelligence about those who don’t. They’re making a list and most certainly will be checking it twice. Meanwhile, legitimate threats to our air travel security (and they DO exist) seem to be taking a back seat to the larger threat of the multitude of non-criminal American citizens who object to having their Constitutional rights violated.

As I have written before, it has nothing to do with security and everything to do with control.

[vector7]

Ah, here we go...real time biometrics system headed for the population.

HOMELAND SECURITY
TSA, Pilots Weigh Biometric System for Airport Screening

Iris Scan & Fingerprints Substituted For TSA Screening

Published on 11-23-2010

Source: Consumer Reports

An opt-in program that charges airline passengers to bypass airport security lines is being resuscitated more than two years after its abrupt shutdown. The CLEAR program re-launched in Orlando last week, and is preparing to start up in Denver. After submitting fingerprints and iris scans, members are issued a CLEARcard with these biometric data. Kiosks at participating airports then allow them to confirm their identity and “speed through security.”

Verified Identity Pass shut down the previous program suddenly in June 2009, leaving approximately 165,000 members without refunds. The new owners—Alclear, LLC—purchased CLEAR’s assets in bankruptcy reorganization, and are offering reinstatement to those who were left stranded. Under the current terms, membership will be renewed upon first use or when CLEAR begins operating in the member’s home market, whichever occurs first.

Members should also note that annual memberships will automatically begin renewing again, at the cost of $179 per years. However, CLEAR says it will provide 30 days notice prior to processing charges.

A similar program, dubbed iQueue, currently operates in Indianapolis and “expects” to launch in additional cities this year. Annual enrollment is $119, and former CLEAR members are credited up to 12 months.

CLEAR was founded by Steven Brill in 2005 and at its peak it was available at 23 airports. However, in 2008 Consumer Reports Money Adviser noted the card—which operated under the Transportation Security Administration’s Registered Traveler program—was “a shortcut with serious trade-offs.”

Both Consumers Union and the American Civil Liberties Union voiced concerns over user privacy. In addition, C.U. questioned both the security benefits of the CLEAR program, as well as its necessity, given that an analysis of airport wait times “found many that did not seem onerous.”

Unfortunately, the TSA’s airport Wait Time Calculator is currently under construction. But prior to enrolling in CLEAR, you may want to determine just how lengthy the queues are at the airports you most frequent.

— William J. McGee