Thread: Transportation Security Administration

TSA Special Agent John Enright, left, speaks to Steven Frischling outside the blogger's home in Niantic, Connecticut, after returning Frischling's laptop Wednesday.
Photo: Thomas Cain/Wired.com

Two bloggers received home visits from Transportation Security Administration agents Tuesday after they published a new TSA directive that revises screening procedures and puts new restrictions on passengers in the wake of a recent bombing attempt by the so-called underwear bomber.

Special agents from the TSA’s Office of Inspection interrogated two U.S. bloggers, one of them an established travel columnist, and served them each with a civil subpoena demanding information on the anonymous source that provided the TSA document.

The document, which the two bloggers published within minutes of each other Dec. 27, was sent by TSA to airlines and airports around the world and described temporary new requirements for screening passengers through Dec. 30, including conducting “pat-downs� of legs and torsos. The document, which was not classified, was posted by numerous bloggers. Information from it was also published on some airline websites.

“They’re saying it’s a security document but it was sent to every airport and airline,� says Steven Frischling, one of the bloggers. “It was sent to Islamabad, to Riyadh and to Nigeria. So they’re looking for information about a security document sent to 10,000-plus people internationally. You can’t have a right to expect privacy after that.�

Transportation Security Administration spokeswoman Suzanne Trevino said in a statement that security directives “are not for public disclosure.�

“TSA’s Office of Inspections is currently investigating how the recent Security Directives were acquired and published by parties who should not have been privy to this information,� the statement said.

Frischling, a freelance travel writer and photographer in Connecticut who writes a blog for the KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, said the two agents who visited him arrived around 7 p.m. Tuesday, were armed and threatened him with a criminal search warrant if he didn’t provide the name of his source. They also threatened to get him fired from his KLM job and indicated they could get him designated a security risk, which would make it difficult for him to travel and do his job.

“They were indicating there would be significant ramifications if I didn’t cooperate,� said Frischling, who was home alone with his three children when the agents arrived. “It’s not hard to intimidate someone when they’re holding a 3-year-old [child] in their hands. My wife works at night. I go to jail, and my kids are here with nobody.�

Frischling, who described some of the details of the visit on his personal blog, told Threat Level that the two agents drove to his house in Connecticut from DHS offices in Massachusetts and New Jersey and didn’t mention a subpoena until an hour into their visit.

“They came to the door and immediately were asking, ‘Who gave you this document?, Why did you publish the document?’ and ‘I don’t think you know how much trouble you’re in.’ It was very much a hardball tactic,� he says.

When they pulled a subpoena from their briefcase and told him he was legally required to provide the information they requested, he said he needed to contact a lawyer. The agents said they’d sit outside his house until he gave them the information they wanted.

Frischling says he received the document anonymously from someone using a Gmail account and determined, after speaking with an attorney, that he might as well cooperate with the agents since he had little information about the source and there was no federal shield law to protect him.

The Gmail address consisted of the name “Mike,� followed by random numbers and letters. Frischling had already deleted the e-mail after publishing the document but said he had learned from previous correspondence with the source that he had been hired as a screener for the TSA in 2009.

The agents searched through Frischling’s BlackBerry and iPhone and questioned him about a number of phone numbers and messages in the devices. One number listed in his phone under “ICEMOM� was a quick dial to his mother, in case of emergency. The agents misunderstood the acronym and became suspicious that it was code for his anonymous source and asked if his source worked for ICE — the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The agents then said they wanted to take an image of his hard drive. Frischling said they had to go to WalMart to buy a hard drive, but when they returned were unable to get it to work. Frischling said the keyboard on his laptop was no longer working after they tried to copy his files. The agents left around 11 p.m. but came back Wednesday morning and, with Frischling’s consent, seized his laptop, which they promised to return after copying the hard drive.

Frischling wrote on his blog that he decided to publish the TSA directive to clear up much of the confusion and speculation that was circulating among the public about changes that were being instituted in airport security procedures after a passenger unsuccessfully tried to ignite a bomb Dec. 25 using a syringe and explosive chemicals hidden in his underwear.

“We are a free society, knowledge is power and informing the masses allows for public conversation and collective understanding,� Frischling wrote on his blog. “You can agree or disagree, but you need information to know if you want to agree or disagree. My goal is to inform and help people better understand what is happening, as well as allow them to form their own opinions.�

A former federal prosecutor who asked not to be identified told Threat Level that the TSA is being heavy-handed in how it’s handling the matter.

“It strikes me that someone at TSA is apoplectic that somehow there’s a sense that they’re not doing their job right,� he told Threat level. “To go into this one reporter’s house and copy his computer files and threaten him, it strikes me that they’re more aggressive with this reporter than with the guy who got on this flight.�

Christopher Elliott, who is based in Florida and writes a column for the Washington Post, MSNBC and others, received a visit from a TSA special agent named Robert Flaherty around 6:30 p.m. Tuesday.

Elliott wouldn’t discuss the details of the visit with Threat Level, due to pending legal issues, but he describes in his blog post how he got a knock on his door shortly after finishing dinner and putting his three young children in the bathtub.

Flaherty showed him a badge and said he wanted information about the source of the document he published. When Elliott told him he’d need to see a subpoena, Flaherty pulled one out and handed it to Elliott.

Elliott told Threat Level they talked for 10 to 20 minutes, but he refused to cooperate. Flaherty left but called Wednesday to remind Elliott that he had until the end of the business day to comply with the subpoena.

“I really don’t think they thought this one through,� said Elliott about the TSA tactics.

Elliott could face a fine and up to a year in jail for failure to comply, according to a statement on the subpoena.

The TSA directive was issued Christmas Day, the date of the attempted attack on Northwest Flight 253, and indicates that the directive will expire Dec. 30. The directive applies to anyone operating a scheduled or charter flight departing from a foreign location and destined for the United States.

It requires all passengers to undergo a “thorough pat-down,� which should concentrate on their upper legs and torso, at the boarding gate. It also requires physical inspection of all “accessible property� accompanying passengers at the boarding gate, “with focus on syringes being transported along with powders and/or liquids.� It also indicates that restrictions against liquids, aerosols and gels should be strictly adhered to. Heads of state can be exempted from the special screening.

Passengers are also required to remain seated during the last hour of flights, and cannot access carry-on baggage or have blankets, pillows or other personal belongings on their lap during this time.

Aircraft phones, internet service, TV programming and global positioning systems are to be disabled prior to boarding and during all phases of flight. Flight crews are also prohibited from making any announcements to passengers about the flight path or the plane’s position over cities or landmarks.

The TSA was embarrassed earlier this month after a contract worker posted an improperly redacted sensitive screening manual on a government site.

That document revealed which passengers are more likely to be targeted for secondary screening, who is exempt from screening, TSA procedures for screening foreign dignitaries and CIA-escorted passengers, and extensive instructions for calibrating Siemens walk-through metal detectors.

Five TSA workers were put on leave pending an internal investigation into how that document got posted.

Part 1: EclippTV :: Video :: 29/12/2009 Gerald Celente on Alex Jones Tv 1/4 Obamageddon!!
Part 2: EclippTV :: Video :: 29/12/2009 Gerald Celente on Alex Jones Tv 2/4 Obamageddon!!
Part 3: EclippTV :: Video :: 29/12/2009 Gerald Celente on Alex Jones Tv 3/4 Obamageddon!!
Part 4: EclippTV :: Video :: Gerald Celente on Alex Jones Tv "Obamageddon!!" 4/4

Kindler and Gentler...should we spell TSA as KGB?

Another case of TSA overkill

[IMG]http://media.philly.com/images/40*40/may08_inq_rubin_dan1.jpg[/IMG]

By Daniel Rubin

Inquirer Columnist

Just when I thought I was out of the Transportation Security Administration business for a few columns, they pull me back in.

Did you hear about the Camden cop whose disabled son wasn't allowed to pass through airport security unless he took off his leg braces?

Unfortunately, it's no joke. This happened to Bob Thomas, a 53-year-old officer in Camden's emergency crime suppression team, who was flying to Orlando in March with his wife, Leona, and their son, Ryan.

Ryan was taking his first flight, to Walt Disney World, for his fourth birthday.

The boy is developmentally delayed, one of the effects of being born 16 weeks prematurely. His ankles are malformed and his legs have low muscle tone. In March he was just starting to walk.

Mid-morning on March 19, his parents wheeled his stroller to the TSA security point, a couple of hours before their Southwest Airlines flight was to depart.

The boy's father broke down the stroller and put it on the conveyor belt as Leona Thomas walked Ryan through the metal detector.

The alarm went off.

The screener told them to take off the boy's braces.

The Thomases were dumbfounded. "I told them he can't walk without them on his own," Bob Thomas said.

"He said, 'He'll need to take them off.' "

Ryan's mother offered to walk him through the detector after they removed the braces, which are custom-made of metal and hardened plastic.

No, the screener replied. The boy had to walk on his own.

Leona Thomas said she was calm. Bob Thomas said he was starting to burn.

They complied, and Leona went first, followed by Ryan, followed by Bob, so the boy wouldn't be hurt if he fell. Ryan made it through.

By then, Bob Thomas was furious. He demanded to see a supervisor. The supervisor asked what was wrong.

"I told him, 'This is overkill. He's 4 years old. I don't think he's a terrorist.' "

The supervisor replied, "You know why we're doing this," Thomas said.

Thomas said he told the supervisor he was going to file a report, and at that point the man turned and walked away.

Daniel Rubin: Another case of TSA overkill | Philadelphia Inquirer | 02/15/2010

The guy is lucky they didn't call in a SWAT team to kill the kid.

"They hate us because of our freedoms"

Originally Posted by Davy Crockett

"I told him, 'This is overkill. He's 4 years old. I don't think he's a terrorist.' "

Wow.

What does one say to that? It's bad enough that I have to take off my shoes, coat, open my laptop, and put everything through their machines, but then I also have to take off my daughter's shoes, take her coat off, etc. I mean, really, is my 4.5 year old going to terrorize people? She can't do that willingly. She doesn't even know what terrorism is. If I was to put explosives on her person, that's a different story.

But . . .

Really?

A 4 year old?

Anyone remember this?




From the photograher, Dean Shaddock:

This was captured as I collected my things from airport security (Detroit Metro Concourse A). I think of it as something like a Rorschach test. Is an elderly Catholic nun being frisked by a Muslim security agent the celebration of blind justice? Or is it simply an admission of absurdity?

Originally Posted by Davy Crockett

Is an elderly Catholic nun being frisked by a Muslim security agent the celebration of blind justice? Or is it simply an admission of absurdity?

It's an admission that WWIII was fought on September 11 2001, lasted a little over an hour, and 19 muslimz armed with boxcutters defeated the US of A.

Just because they didn't march us onto a battleship, hand us a pen, and tell us where to sign the formal Unconditional Surrender, doesn't mean we didn't lose.

TSA to swab airline passengers' hands in search for explosives

By Jeanne Meserve and Mike M. Ahlers, CNN
February 17, 2010 12:21 p.m. EST






TSA to swab airline passengers' hands in search for explosives - CNN.com








STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• After Christmas Day attack, agency to begin random swabbings
• Previously, screeners swabbed some carry-on luggage and other objects
• Security experts call hand swabbing a good move
• Privacy advocates back tests, provided TSA tests only for security, doesn't discriminate

Washington (CNN) -- To the list of instructions you hear at airport checkpoints, add this: "Put your palms forward, please."

The Transportation Security Administration soon will begin randomly swabbing passengers' hands at checkpoints and airport gates to test them for traces of explosives.

Previously, screeners swabbed some carry-on luggage and other objects as they searched for the needle in the security haystack -- components of terrorist bombs in an endless stream of luggage.

But after the Christmas Day attempted bombing of Northwest Flight 253 over Detroit, Michigan, the TSA began a program of swabbing passengers' hands, which could be contaminated by explosive materials, experts say. The TSA will greatly expand the swabbing in the coming weeks, the agency said.

"The point is to make sure that the air environment is a safe environment," Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told CNN. "We know that al Qaeda [and other] terrorists continue to think of aviation as a way to attack the United States. One way we keep it safe is by new technology [and] random use of different types of technology."

Security experts consulted by CNN said swabbing hands is a good move, and privacy advocates said they support the new swabbing protocols, provided the agency tests only for security-related objects and does not discriminate when it selects people to be tested.


America has gone off the deep end. Our federal agents whisks a crotch bomber through checkpoints overseas without a passport, and we have muslims searching old nuns in wheelchairs at home......

Pure idiocy. Love the pic. It reminds me of a time I was doing some business at a VA hospital in ny. Its a government building so you have to pass through security (metal detector, bag check). There was an old man in front of me, def a WW2 vet in his 70s maybe 80s. Security (a black with a square badge) was giving him a hard time because he couldn't pass through the detector without his walker. Even if this old man wanted to be a threat his crippled old body wouldn't let him. The idiocy reins supreme.
Now I don't get a chance to fly much but I can never once remember seeing bomb sniffing dogs at any airport. The ferry to manhattan from staten island has bomb dogs in the terminal. Wouldn't that be more effective then hand swabs?

American Renaissance News: Obama's TSA Pick: Hire on 'Ethnic Diversity'


Aaron Klein, WorldNetDaily, March 8, 2010
President Obama’s pick to head the Transportation Security Administration long has pushed for “ethnic diversity� as a determining factor in hiring new teams for U.S. military and intelligence agencies, WND has learned.
The president announced today his nominee for TSA chief, retired Gen. Robert Harding.

He has lobbied for “ethnic diversity� in the U.S. defense establishment.
WND found that in 2003, Harding submitted written testimony to a Senate subcommittee hearing on intelligence issues pushing for more diversity at security agencies, going so far as to call diversity a “requirement.�

“Working with larger defense contractors, I find that bringing in multicultural talent remains challenging, especially on classified contracts,� Harding wrote.
Harding noted how he previously testified in Senate hearings while working at the Defense Department. He then applauded the senatorial committee for remaining “steadfastly clear about the need for diversity in the ranks of the CIA.�
He urged the Defense Department to “build systems and incentives to attract, maintain and sustain a diverse group of gifted (human intelligence) operatives.�
Harding maintained the military community “still needs senior folks with language and diversity at the top—folks who feel a responsibility in a particularly focused way.�
Harding declared “selection must be made at the senior levels!�
He added, “[There are] many ways to do that, but if legislation is needed maybe it should be part of the discussion here.�

Harding, meanwhile, would not be the only Obama administration official with controversial views on diversity.
WND reported President Obama’s counter-terrorism advisor, John Brennan, last month stated the White House is working to calibrate policies in the fight against terrorism that ensure Americans are “never� profiled.
Speaking at a question-and-answer session for Muslim law students at New York University, Brennan declared himself a “citizen of the world.�
The meeting was facilitated by the Islamic Society of North America, a radical Muslim group that was an unindicted co-conspirator in a scheme to raise money for Hamas.

As we wrote in our newsletter this week: scanners and backscatter devices are under pressure from all sides. Despite the best efforts of Michael Chertoff and the TSA, word is out that Backscatter X-ray scanner technology that is being used in airports is exceedingly harmful, along with being an invasion of privacy.

An increasing number of people are becoming informed and are deciding to opt-out of the radiation and the X-rated detail of you and your family. Naturally, this has forced the TSA to threaten more invasive physical searches, as they try to coerce people into taking the "easier" option. This is a sign of desperation, since the success of these machines in airports will determine the future of their presence throughout America. They already are being deployed in street roving vans, and are most likely headed to a mall near you if the public doesn't continue to raise its voice.

This Daily Mail article on the subject is another nail in the coffin for X-ray scanning technology. Even if you don't care about privacy issues, the fact that experts are now saying that "radiation from the scanners has been underestimated," and that "because the beam concentrates on the skin -- one of the most radiation-sensitive organs of the human body -- that (the) dose may be up to 20 times higher than first estimated," should sound the final alarm.

G. Edward Griffin and Idaho state representative, Phil Hart, have made a strong case that the states have jurisdiction over this Federal program, which has yet to be approved by Congress.

The battle almost has been won before it began; with public support of proposed state legislation, we will see these machines sent to the waste bin where they belong.


Activist Post: Airport Body Scanners Under Pressure: Experts Now Warn X-ray Devices "could give you cancer"

My name is Michael Roberts, and I am a pilot for ExpressJet Airlines, Inc., based in Houston (that is, I still am for the time being). This morning as I attempted to pass through the security line for my commute to work I was denied access to the secured area of the terminal building at Memphis International Airport. I have passed through the same line roughly once per week for the past four and a half years without incident. Today, however, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agents at this checkpoint were using one of the new Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) systems that are currently being deployed at airports across the nation. These are the controversial devices featured by the media in recent months, albeit sparingly, which enable screeners to see beneath people’s clothing to an extremely graphic and intrusive level of detail (virtual strip searching). Travelers refusing this indignity may instead be physically frisked by a government security agent until the agent is satisfied to release them on their way in what is being touted as an “alternative option” to AIT. The following is a somewhat hastily drafted account of my experience this morning.
As I loaded my bags onto the X-ray scanner belt, an agent told me to remove my shoes and send them through as well, which I’ve not normally been required to do when passing through the standard metal detectors in uniform. When I questioned her, she said it was necessary to remove my shoes for the AIT scanner. I explained that I did not wish to participate in the AIT program, so she told me I could keep my shoes and directed me through the metal detector that had been roped off. She then called somewhat urgently to the agents on the other side: “We got an opt-out!” and also reported the “opt-out” into her handheld radio. On the other side I was stopped by another agent and informed that because I had “opted out” of AIT screening, I would have to go through secondary screening. I asked for clarification to be sure he was talking about frisking me, which he confirmed, and I declined. At this point he and another agent explained the TSA’s latest decree, saying I would not be permitted to pass without showing them my naked body, and how my refusal to do so had now given them cause to put their hands on me as I evidently posed a threat to air transportation security (this, of course, is my nutshell synopsis of the exchange). I asked whether they did in fact suspect I was concealing something after I had passed through the metal detector, or whether they believed that I had made any threats or given other indications of malicious designs to warrant treating me, a law-abiding fellow citizen, so rudely. None of that was relevant, I was told. They were just doing their job.

Eventually the airport police were summoned. Several officers showed up and we essentially repeated the conversation above. When it became clear that we had reached an impasse, one of the more sensible officers and I agreed that any further conversation would be pointless at this time. I then asked whether I was free to go. I was not. Another officer wanted to see my driver’s license. When I asked why, he said they needed information for their report on this “incident” – my name, address, phone number, etc. I recited my information for him, until he asked for my supervisor’s name and number at the airline. Why did he need that, I asked. For the report, he answered. I had already given him the primary phone number at my company’s headquarters. When I asked him what the Chief Pilot in Houston had to do with any of this, he either refused or was simply unable to provide a meaningful explanation. I chose not to divulge my supervisor’s name as I preferred to be the first to inform him of the situation myself. In any event, after a brief huddle with several other officers, my interrogator told me I was free to go.
As I approached the airport exit, however, I was stopped again by a man whom I believe to be the airport police chief, though I can’t say for sure. He said I still needed to speak with an investigator who was on his way over. I asked what sort of investigator. A TSA investigator, he said. As I was by this time looking eagerly forward to leaving the airport, I had little patience for the additional vexation. I’d been denied access to my workplace and had no other business keeping me there.
“Am I under arrest?” I asked.
“No, he just needs to ask you some more questions.”
“But I was told I’m free to go. So… am I being detained now, or what?”
“We just need to hold you here so he can…”
“Hold me in what capacity?” I insisted.

“Detain you while we…”
Okay, so now they were detaining me as I was leaving the airport facility.
We stood there awkwardly, waiting for the investigator while he kept an eye on me. Being chatty by nature, I asked his opinion of what new procedures might be implemented if someday someone were to smuggle an explosive device in his or her rectum or a similar orifice. Ever since would-be terrorist Richard Reid set his shoes on fire, travelers have been required to remove their footwear in the security line. And the TSA has repeatedly attempted to justify these latest measures by citing Northwest flight 253, on which Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab scorched his genitalia. Where, then, would the evolution of these policies lead next?
“Do you want them to board your plane?” he asked.
“No, but I understand there are other, better ways to keep them off. Besides, at this point I’m more concerned with the greater threat to our rights and liberties as a free society.”
“Yeah, I know,” he said. And then, to my amazement, he continued, “But somebody’s already taken those away.”
“Maybe they have,” I conceded, watching the throng of passengers waiting their turn to get virtually naked for the federal security guards.
As a side note, I cannot refrain here from expressing my dismay and heartbreak over a civil servant’s personal resignation to the loss of civil liberty among the people by whom he is employed to protect and serve. If he no longer affirms the rights and freedom of his fellow citizens, one can only wonder exactly what he has in view as the purpose of his profession.

The TSA investigator arrived and asked for my account of the situation. I explained that the agents weren’t allowing me to pass through the checkpoint. He told me he had been advised that I was refusing security screening, to which I replied that I had willingly walked through the metal detector with no alarms, the same way I always do when commuting to work. He then briefed me on the recent screening policy changes and, apparently confused, asked whether they would be a problem for me. I stated that I did indeed have a problem with the infringement of my civil rights and liberty.
His reply: “That’s irrelevant.”
It wasn’t irrelevant to me. We continued briefly in the conversation until I recognized that we were essentially repeating the same discussion I’d already had with the other officers and agents standing by. With that realization, I told him I did not wish to keep going around and around with them and asked whether he had anything else to say to me. Yes, he said he did, marching indignantly over to a table nearby with an air as though he were about to do something drastic.
“I need to get your information for my report,” he demanded.
“The officer over there just took my information for his report. I’m sure you could just get it from him.”
“No, I have to document everything separately and send it to TSOC. That’s the Transportation Security Operations Center where we report…”
“I’m familiar with TSOC,” I assured him. “In fact, I’ve actually taught the TSA mandated security portion of our training program at the airline.”
“Well, if you’re an instructor, then you should know better,” he barked.
“Really? What do you mean I ‘should know better’? Are you scolding me? Have I done something wrong?”
“I’m not saying you’ve done something wrong. But you have to go through security screening if you want to enter the facility.”

“Understood. I’ve been going through security screening right here in this line for five years and never blown up an airplane, broken any laws, made any threats, or had a government agent call my boss in Houston. And you guys have never tried to touch me or see me naked that whole time. But, if that’s what it’s come to now, I don’t want to enter the facility that badly.”
Finishing up, he asked me to confirm that I had been offered secondary screening as an alternative “option” to ATS, and that I had refused it. I confirmed. Then he asked whether I’d “had words” with any of the agents. I asked what he meant by that and he said he wanted to know whether there had been “any exchange of words.” I told him that yes, we spoke. He then turned to the crowd of officers and asked whether I had been abusive toward any of them when they wanted to create images of my naked body and touch me in an unwelcome manner. I didn’t hear what they said in reply, but he returned and finally told me I was free to leave the airport.
As it turned out, they did reach the chief pilot’s office in Houston before I was able to. Shortly after I got home, my boss called and said they had been contacted by the TSA. I suppose my employment status at this point can best be described as on hold.
It’s probably fairly obvious here that I am outraged. This took place today, 15 October 2010. Anyone who reads this is welcome to contact me for confirmation of the details or any additional information I can provide. The dialog above is quoted according to my best recollection, without embellishment or significant alteration except for the sake of clarity. I would greatly appreciate any recommendations for legal counsel – preferably a firm with a libertarian bent and experience resisting this kind of tyrannical madness. This is not a left or right, red or blue state issue. The very bedrock of our way of life in this country is under attack from within. Please don’t let it be taken from us without a fight.

Malo Periculosam Libertatem Quam Quietum Servitium


Michael S. Roberts
3794 Douglass Ave.
Memphis, TN 38111
FedUpFlyers@nonpartisan.com


American Patriot Airline Pilot FED-UP! I Stand With Him! | Republic Broadcasting Network

American Citizen Meg McLain Singled out by the TSA, Cuffed to a Chair, Her Ticket Ripped up!

YouTube - Meg McLain Singled out by the TSA, Cuffed to a Chair, Her Ticket Ripped up! - Alex Jones Tv 1/2

The Washington Government intends to force us to accept "necessary evils" but just because something is EVIL does not mean that it is necessary!

Submitted by LForD on Sat, 11/13/2010 - 18:31in

• Daily Paul Liberty Forum

http://johnnyedge.blogspot.com/2010/11/these-events-took-pla...
These events took place roughly between 5:30 and 6:30 AM, November 13th in Terminal 2 of the San Diego International Airport. I'm writing this approximately 2 1/2 hours after the events transpired, and they are correct to the best of my recollection. I will admit to being particularly fuzzy on the exact order of events when dealing with the agents after getting my ticket refunded; however, all of the events described did occur.


I had my phone recording audio and video of much of these events. It can be viewed below.


Please spread this story as far and wide as possible. I will make no claims to copyright or otherwise.]


This morning, I tried to fly out of San Diego International Airport but was refused by the TSA. I had been somewhat prepared for this eventuality. I have been reading about the millimeter wave and backscatter x-ray machines and the possible harm to health as well as the vivid pictures they create of people's naked bodies. Not wanting to go through them, I had done my research on the TSA's website prior to traveling to see if SAN had them. From all indications, they did not. When I arrived at the security line, I found that the TSA's website was out of date. SAN does in fact utilize backscatter x-ray machines.


I made my way through the line toward the first line of "defense": the TSA ID checker. This agent looked over my boarding pass, looked over my ID, looked at me and then back at my ID. After that, he waved me through. SAN is still operating metal detectors, so I walked over to one of the lines for them. After removing my shoes and making my way toward the metal detector, the person in front of me in line was pulled out to go through the backscatter machine. After asking what it was and being told, he opted out. This left the machine free, and before I could go through the metal detector, I was pulled out of line to go through the backscatter machine. When asked, I half-chuckled and said, "I don't think so." At this point, I was informed that I would be subject to a pat down, and I waited for another agent.


A male agent (it was a female who had directed me to the backscatter machine in the first place), came and waited for me to get my bags and then directed me over to the far corner of the area for screening. After setting my things on a table, he turned to me and began to explain that he was going to do a "standard" pat down. (I thought to myself, "great, not one of those gropings like I've been reading about".) After he described, the pat down, I realized that he intended to touch my groin. After he finished his description but before he started the pat down, I looked him straight in the eye and said, "if you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested." He, a bit taken aback, informed me that he would have to involve his supervisor because of my comment.


We both stood there for no more than probably two minutes before a female TSA agent (apparently, the supervisor) arrived. She described to me that because I had opted out of the backscatter screening, I would now be patted down, and that involved running hands up the inside of my legs until they felt my groin. I stated that I would not allow myself to be subject to a molestation as a condition of getting on my flight. The supervisor informed me that it was a standard administrative security check and that they were authorized to do it. I repeated that I felt what they were doing was a sexual assault, and that if they were anyone but the government, the act would be illegal. I believe that I was then informed that if I did not submit to the inspection, I would not be getting on my flight. I again stated that I thought the search was illegal. I told her that I would be willing to submit to a walk through the metal detector as over 80% of the rest of the people were doing, but I would not be groped. The supervisor, then offered to go get her supervisor.


I took a seat in a tiny metal chair next to the table with my belongings and waited. While waiting, I asked the original agent (who was supposed to do the pat down) if he had many people opt out to which he replied, none (or almost none, I don't remember exactly). He said that I gave up a lot of rights when I bought my ticket. I replied that the government took them away after September 11th. There was silence until the next supervisor arrived. A few minutes later, the female agent/supervisor arrived with a man in a suit (not a uniform). He gave me a business card identifying him as David Silva, Transportation Security Manager, San Diego International Airport. At this point, more TSA agents as well as what I assume was a local police officer arrived on the scene and surrounded the area where I was being detained. The female supervisor explained the situation to Mr. Silva. After some quick back and forth (that I didn't understand/hear), I could overhear Mr. Silva say something to the effect of, "then escort him from the airport." I again offered to submit to the metal detector, and my father-in-law, who was near by also tried to plead for some reasonableness on the TSA's part.


The female supervisor took my ID at this point and began taking some kind of report with which I cooperated. Once she had finished, I asked if I could put my shoes back on. I was allowed to put my shoes back on and gather my belongs. I asked, "are we done here" (it was clear at this point that I was going to be escorted out), and the local police officer said, "follow me". I followed him around the side of the screening area and back out to the ticketing area. I said apologized to him for the hassle, to which he replied that it was not a problem.


I made my way over to the American Airlines counter, explained the situation, and asked if my ticket could be refunded. The woman behind the counter furiously typed away for about 30 seconds before letting me know that she would need a supervisor. She went to the other end of the counter. When she returned, she informed me that the ticket was non-refundable, but that she was still trying to find a supervisor. After a few more minutes, she was able to refund my ticket. I told her that I had previously had a bad experience with American Airlines and had sworn never to fly with them again (I rationalized this trip since my father-in-law had paid for the ticket), but that after her helpfulness, I would once again be willing to use their carrier again.


At this point, I thought it was all over. I began to make my way to the stairs to exit the airport, when I was approached by another man in slacks and a sport coat. He was accompanied by the officer that had escorted me to the ticketing area and Mr. Silva. He informed me that I could not leave the airport. He said that once I start the screening in the secure area, I could not leave until it was completed. Having left the area, he stated, I would be subject to a civil suit and a $10,000 fine. I asked him if he was also going to fine the 6 TSA agents and the local police officer who escorted me from the secure area. After all, I did exactly what I was told. He said that they didn't know the rules, and that he would deal with them later. They would not be subject to civil penalties. I then pointed to Mr. Silva and asked if he would be subject to any penalties. He is the agents' supervisor, and he directed them to escort me out. The man informed me that Mr. Silva was new and he would not be subject to penalties, either. He again asserted the necessity that I return to the screening area. When I asked why, he explained that I may have an incendiary device and whether or not that was true needed to be determined. I told him that I would submit to a walk through the metal detector, but that was it; I would not be groped. He told me that their procedures are on their website, and therefore, I was fully informed before I entered the airport; I had implicitly agreed to whatever screening they deemed appropriate. I told him that San Diego was not listed on the TSA's website as an airport using Advanced Imaging Technology, and I believed that I would only be subject to the metal detector. He replied that he was not a webmaster, and I asked then why he was referring me to the TSA's website if he didn't know anything about it. I again refused to re-enter the screening area.


The man asked me to stay put while he walked off to confer with the officer and Mr. Silva. They went about 20 feet away and began talking amongst themselves while I waited. I couldn't over hear anything, but I got the impression that the police officer was recounting his version of the events that had transpired in the screening area (my initial refusal to be patted down). After a few minutes, I asked loudly across the distance if I was free to leave. The man dismissively held up a finger and said, "hold on". I waited. After another minute or so, he returned and asked for my name. I asked why he needed it, and reminded him that the female supervisor/agent had already taken a report. He said that he was trying to be friendly and help me out. I asked to what end. He reminded me that I could be sued civilly and face a $10,000 fine and that my cooperation could help mitigate the penalties I was facing. I replied that he already had my information in the report that was taken and I asked if I was free to leave. I reminded him that he was now illegally detaining me and that I would not be subject to screening as a condition of leaving the airport. He told me that he was only trying to help (I should note that his demeanor never suggested that he was trying to help. I was clearly being interrogated.), and that no one was forcing me to stay. I asked if tried to leave if he would have the officer arrest me. He again said that no one was forcing me to stay. I looked him in the eye, and said, "then I'm leaving". He replied, "then we'll bring a civil suit against you", to which I said, "you bring that suit" and walked out of the airport.


This video starts with my bag and belongings going through the x-ray machine.They're kind of long, and they don't show much, but the audio is really good.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7txGwoITSj4&feature=player_em...
I was in the middle of telling someone that if I was going to be felt up, I wanted it done in public so that everyone could see what it is that the TSA does. Here is the rest of that video.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RaFZ1CElU8&feature=player_em...
After I was escorted out to the ticketing area, I went to have my ticket refunded. I didn't have the opportunity or the presence of mind to turn the camera back on until everyone walked away from me.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwFh8HQttTQ&feature=player_em..

UPDATE: DHS chief tells pilot, tourism reps scans and patdowns will continue





The federal government has been forced to respond to the accelerating backlash against new TSA measures which have outraged the nation, with TSA Administrator John Pistole and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano set to meet today with executives from the travel industry and heads of pilot associations.


Following intense and sustained focus on the issue by the Drudge Report, Infowars and Prison Planet, Reuters reports that, “Executives from the travel industry, including online travel sites, theme parks and hotels, were set to meet Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Pistole on Friday to discuss their concerns that security is crimping travel.”
The feds were forced into action after five prominent pilot and travel associations, along with a flight attendants union, vowed to boycott naked body scanners as well as the new invasive pat down procedure, threatening travel chaos. The backlash has also been characterized by new cases of individuals being abused at the hands of the TSA, stories which continue to pour in on a daily basis.


In addition, the TSA is reviewing its policies towards children at security checkpoints following widespread revulsion at the fact that TSA workers, some of whom may be pedophiles given the agency’s poor standard of background checks for its own employees, are openly groping children’s genitals in airports across the country.

“We have received hundreds of e-mails and phone calls from travelers vowing to stop flying,” said Geoff Freeman, an executive vice president of the U.S. Travel Association, which set up the meeting with the Obama administration officials.
“You can’t talk on the one hand about creating jobs in this country and getting this economy back on track and on the other hand discourage millions of Americans from flying, which is the gateway to commerce,” he said.

It’s vital that those representing outraged Americans at today’s meeting with Napolitano and Pistole do not allow themselves to be placated by the rhetoric they will undoubtedly hear about the supposed terror threat making the new TSA measures a necessity.

• A d v e r t i s e m e n t
• 
  

As we have documented, the TSA’s non-existent background checks on its own employees underscore the fact that the agency couldn’t care less about security, otherwise it wouldn’t have allowed illegal aliens to work in sensitive areas of airports or have given them the green light to fly planes.


Furthermore, as the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg revealed, TSA workers told him directly that they refer to the new body scanner devices as “dick measurers,” and that the more aggressive groping measures had nothing to do with security and were in fact instituted solely to force people to choose the scanner over the pat down.


The so-called “pat-downs,” which in reality fall not far short of sexual molestation, have nothing to do with security. They are about ritualizing the process of making Americans submit to complete degradation at the hands of authority figures, no matter what level of humiliation that process encompasses. If you allow the government to get away with groping your children’s genitals there’s no limit to the abuse they will subsequently engage in.


The Reuters article mentions the example of a father who witnessed his 8-year-old son be selected for “extra screening” by TSA thugs, who proceeded to touch the boy’s genitals.


“We spend my child’s whole life telling him that only mom, dad and a doctor can touch you in your private area, and now we have to add TSA agent and that’s just wrong,” he told Reuters. “At some point the terrorists have won.”


The fact that the TSA and Homeland Security has been forced to respond to the national outrage over groping and naked body scanners is a major victory, but we cannot rest until the groping, not just of children but all passengers, is ended and the cancer-causing body scanners are removed for good.


Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)
No terror threat, be it genuine or contrived, can justify the federal government treating American citizens with less respect than farmyard animals, and since TSA workers openly admit that the sexual molestation of travelers is about forcing them to use the scanner and has nothing to do with security, this underscores the fact that the groping procedure and the scanner are both tools of oppression that have no place in a free society.