By Seth Richardson
John Tyner had the unmitigated gall to object to having his “junk” groped by TSA security screeners in San Diego, and has become the populist champion of personal privacy and objection to Transportation Security Administration airport grope-fests, thanks to the internet.
What’s more sinister is that San Deigo TSA chief Michael J. Aguilar is now investigating Tyner for leaving an airport security area without permission. Tyner potentially faces a fine of more than $12,000.
Problem is, Tyner didn’t leave without permission, he was denied permission to pass through the checkpoint and was escorted from the area by police after telling a TSA agent, “If you touch my junk, I’m gonna have you arrested.”
Aguilar claims that you are legally obligated to submit to, evidently, whatever sort of intrusive search the TSA decides to give you once you enter the security area, and you cannot refuse and leave instead. Where Aguilar, or his boss, TSA head John Pistole, or his boss Homeland Security Janet Napolitano got this idea is something of a legal mystery, given the Fourth Amendment.
Why don’t they just make us strip naked, give us a paper jump suit and slippers, and then sedate us into unconsciousness before loading us into “transport tubes” they then stack with a forklift? Airlines could save a lot of money on in-flight movies and honey-roasted nuts that way, and pack a lot more customers into the available space.
The actual reason for the TSA’s grope-a-dope program is transparently obvious; TSA wants to make objecting to the full-body scanner as unpleasant, sexually intrusive and frightening as possible, in order to dissuade protest. When they get done “upgrading” their hand-search procedures, you’ll fear the TSA more than you fear your proctologist and colonoscopy…which may be on the TSA’s agenda as well, since neither the body-scanner nor a hand search can detect explosives secreted in body cavities, like one’s colon, which is the latest terrorist tactic.
But it’s all a massive charade, and the TSA has to preserve it’s facade of power, control and officious pseudo-competence. TSA knows full well that by unmercifully abusing anyone who objects to being photographed in the nude or physically assaulted by a TSA screener, they can instill fear and unquestioning obedience in the traveling public, thereby gaining “voluntary compliance” with the image scanner program.
It may be reaching the point where people would rather face the chance of a terrorist blowing up their airplane than face the physical assaults of the TSA. And you know what, it’s our right to make that choice. The TSA works for us, and we have every right to demand that Congress rein them in. Especially when there is a better way to detect people who are a threat to air travel.
El Al airlines, the Israeli airline, is widely considered the world’s most secure airline, and their passenger screening and interviewing techniques have thwarted dozens of attempted attacks. Using a layered system that focuses on interrogation and observation of passenger behavior by highly trained security agents to detect “microexpressions” and other signs of nervousness that might indicate a suicide bomber, El Al is able to protect the flying public without taking naked pictures or groping everyone. They only grope suspicious people who appear nervous and can’t satisfactorily explain themselves. Suicide bombers are not known for their James Bond-like ability to tell convincing lies under interrogation, and El Al knows it. El Al requires passengers to report three hours before a flight, and that time is spent repeatedly interviewing and observing passengers to single out those who show the sorts of nervous behavior of suicidal zealots. And it works.
Add to that the use of bomb-sniffing dogs at checkpoints, and we could have a system that is effective that also respects the modesty and privacy of passengers.
So why don’t we use this model? Likely because former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and his cronies are making money selling body scanners to the TSA. Chertoff’s company, Chertoff Group, is a security consulting firm that represents the companies that manufacture the body scanners. We shouldn’t be surprised though, it’s standard government policy to substitute expensive, complex technology that financially benefits Washington insiders for cheap, effective simple technology that doesn’t.
Further investigation of the link between Chertoff and the decision to purchase body scanners and not use psychological profiling and bomb-detecting dogs must occur, and if corruption is found, people need to be prosecuted.
And we should all demand that Congress mandate the El Al model of airline security, which is far more effective and less intrusive than body scanners and can prevent colon-bombers from blowing up aircraft, something expensive body scanners and minimum-wage grope artists can’t do.
© 2010 Altnews
My tribute to TSA (copy and paste into your browser): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paWeWvV8Xqk
Happy Thanksgiving to everyone!
I have had to do hundreds of pat searches, even of children. We were told to look in the diapers too. I never really enjoyed doing them but it was part of the job and I did it the way I was trained to.
One day I was called in to see the supervisor who told me that there had been complaints about the way that I do my pat searches. She preceded to say that that means I must be doing them properly, or there would have been no complaints. Apparently I was too “thorough” according to the complaints. I even pat searched the vendors, who were accustomed to being allowed entry without.
Oh well.
It’s a conundrum. I note, however, that entry to a military base is NOT a civil right, and so I have no problem at all with whatever level of search is required to keep the base secure.
Depending on who is doing it and what his technique is like, I can see myself perhaps wanting to go through the line more than once.
Well, I guess that’s okay, but you have to buy a ticket for each ride…
i agree with your premise of making the inspection so much more vile than the scanner that people will submit to being scanned. and i use the word “submit” in the most pernicious sense. i will not denigrate those who work for the TSA off-handedly, but it is a situation ripe for abuse because the traveling public is not in a good mood to start with. object, and expect a very bad day. why? because you had the audacity to “interfere” with the TSA by opening your mouth. i find that whole premise of submitting in a docile fashion to be repugnant, and i find it unacceptable that this is the best this agency could do. for that, i call bs.
It’s worse than less than the best, it’s pointlessly futile since nothing they do will detect or deter an ass-bomber.
We at least deserve that the indignity that we are forced to suffer in the name of transportation safety actually MEAN something, that it actually have the best possible chance of preventing terrorism.
That’s what really offends me.
Had a chance to catch Glenn Beck yesterday.
Looks like you did too.
The Israeli model is good and I liked the idea of using veterans to profile/interview passengers.
Good points and I give GB credit where due.
On the other hand it’s all a waste of time if they do nothing about the cargo.
The TSA is not intentionally creating a objectionable search to dissuade any public backlash.
Thats just crazy talk.
It’s a matter of them not knowing what to do.
Ignorance, while evenly distributed betwixt the GOP and DEM, is not an intentional act by a guv agency to thwart public outcry.
Thats where GB goes off the wagon.
I don’t understand the paranoia.
Sorry, it’s not ignorance, it’s cupidity and insider politics. The TSA and Homeland Security are perfectly aware of the El Al screening methods, and that program was rejected in favor of body scanners.
And I disagree that the offensiveness of the pat down searches is not deliberate. It’s perfectly clear that it IS deliberate, given how passengers who refuse the scanner are treated, particularly if they also refuse to be sexually assaulted by TSA screeners.
The threat to prosecute Tyner is proof of this.
It is true, however, that TSA underestimated the public backlash to their grope fests. And you’re right about air cargo. Fact is that air cargo should travel on cargo aircraft, and not be permitted AT ALL on passenger aircraft.
Then perhaps we need two kinds of flights: One for those who are willing to give up theri freedom for safety; and other flights for people who want will accept the risks that freedom entails. TSA can determine the screeing process for the Safe Crowd, and only Safe People will be allowed on Safe Flights. The Free Crowd will determine its screening process — without interference by the Supreme Court — and only Free People will be allowed on the Free Flights. It’s called freedom of choice. Remember that?
Better yet, get rid of the TSA entirely and allow the airlines to determine who is safe to fly on THEIR jets. They will do a better job, without antagonizing their customers, and we’ll be more safe because they have an economic motive to both protect their aircraft and their passengers.
And the airlines should use the El Al (Israeli airline) model that uses human beings to question passengers, and explosives-detecting dogs, rather than expensive technology that’s being used merely to enrich the bureaucrats who run the TSA, some of whom have a financial interest in the company that makes the scanners.