Since first posting his video analysis explaining how theU.S. Transportation Security Administration‘s (TSA) naked body scanners do nothing to prevent terrorists from smuggling weapons and other paraphernalia through security, engineer Jon Corbett’s eye-opening revelation has quickly met the heavy hand of attempted censorship. During a recent interview with Alex Jones on theAlex Jones Show, Corbett explained how his video had already begun to go “viral” across the internet within just a few hours of its posting, upon whichYouTubecensored it as containing “inappropriate” content.
Corbett originally posted theYouTubevideo link on his blogTSA Out of Our Pants!on March 6, upon which it was quickly picked up by the U.K.’sDaily Mail, the U.K.’sGuardian,CNET,DailyTech,Russia Today, theHouston Chronicle, theNew York Daily News, and hundreds of other news sources. But as was pointed out by Alex Jones during the recent interview, the original video, which was posted toYouTube, was also quickly censored in the process.
In that suit, “Governor Jesse Ventura, a/k/a James G. Janos … [sought] a declaration that the TSA [Transportation Security Administration] and DHS [Department of Homeland Security, the TSA’s über-bureaucracy] have violated Ventura’s Fourth Amendment rights by subjecting him to airport security searches.”
Mr. Ventura added, “It’s really sad … [The judge] claimed her court didn’t have jurisdiction. But this is a constitutional question…”
Actually, it isn’t – at least to Our Rulers. And not just because they’re evil tyrants who spit on the Constitution. They are and they do, but what Mr. Ventura bumped up against is monstrously worse, something far more dangerous, entrenched, and systemic. Yet it remains so incognito and unsuspected that our hero might want to investigate it for his series, ConspiracyTheory, on TruTV.
The culprit is a totalitarian nightmare known as “administrative law.” And when we victims assume the Constitution reigns supreme, Our Rulers laugh: they legally (even if unconstitutionally) replaced it about a century ago with administrative law.
Orwell must be rolling in his grave. The TSA has just come out and stated they didn’t require the 95-yr-old dying leukemia patient to remove her diaper. Instead, they told the woman they had to inspect it or else she couldn’t board her plane, a requirement by any other name. Amazingly, CNN basically uncritically reports the TSA’s bull and titles their article to give the passerby the impression they presented some sort of evidence to the contrary of the woman’s claims, when instead all they did was attempt to redefine the term require.
Saturday night, a certified TSA official will be at the Santa Fe High School prom to oversee student searches.
This all comes after two Capital High School students, sisters, filed a lawsuit saying they were groped by a security agent at Capital High School’s prom last month. On Friday, the court ordered Santa Fe Public Schools and the security company ASI to provide at least one TSA certified person at the Santa Fe High School prom and the Capital High School graduation.
The restraining order also spells out the specific ways security can perform searches. It says a pat-down is only to be used if there are reasonable grounds and that pat-downs should not be used as a first approach for every student.
KOB Eyewitness News 4 talked to one of the sisters suing the district earlier this week. Candice Herrera said, “She grabbed my breast and shook the inner part of my bra and shook it and then picked up the front of my dress to mid thigh and she was patting down my bare legs.”
Capital’s Principal told us she was standing right there when students were searched and doesn’t remember any students complaining about the pat downs.
Meanwhile, Santa Fe Public Schools says it’s happy to comply with the Federal Court’s decision, saying, student safety is a priority.
Every spring, private security officers at San Francisco International Airport compete in a workplace “March Madness”-style tournament for cash prizes, some as high as $1,500.
The games: finding illegal items and explosives in carry-on bags; successfully picking locks on difficult-to-open luggage; and spotting a would-be terrorist (in this case Covenant Aviation Security’s president, Gerald L. Berry) on security videos.
“The bonuses are pretty handsome,” Berry said. “We have to be good – equal or better than the feds. So we work at it, and we incentivize.”
Some of the nation’s biggest airports are responding to recent public outrage over security screening by weighing whether they should hire private firms such as Covenant to replace the Transportation Security Administration. Sixteen airports, including San Francisco and Kansas City International Airport, have made the switch since 2002. One Orlando airport has approved the change but needs to select a contractor, and several others are seriously considering it.
For airports, the change isn’t about money. At issue, airport managers and security experts say, is the unwieldy size and bureaucracy of the federal aviation security system. Private firms may be able to do the job more efficiently and with a personal touch, they argue.
Airports that choose private screeners must submit the request to the TSA. There are no specific criteria for approval, but federal officials can decide whether to grant the request “based on the airport’s record of compliance on security regulations and requirements.” The TSA pays for the cost of the screening and has the final say on which company gets the contract.
Rep. John L. Mica (R-Fla.), the incoming chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, has written to 200 of the nation’s largest airports, urging them to consider switching to private companies.
The TSA was “never intended to be an army of 67,000 employees,” he said.
“If you look at [the TSA's] performance, have they ever stopped a terrorist? Anyone can get through,” Mica said in an interview. “We’ve been very lucky, very fortunate. TSA should focus on its mission: setting up the protocol, adapting to the changing threats and gathering intelligence.”
The differences between private firms’ employees and federal workers are often imperceptible to the everyday traveler. Covenant security details use different badges and insignia and have higher pay for new employees.
Procedures in airport security lines do not change. Thirty private firms are contracted by the TSA to potentially work as screeners, and their employees are required by federal law to undergo the same training, use the same pat-down techniques and operate the same equipment – such as full-body scanners – that the TSA does. Read More Here
The nation’s controversial airport pat-downs and full-body scanners are here to stay, at least for now.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano defended the systems on CNN this morning, crediting them with preventing unknown numbers of potentially dangerous devices from making their way on to airplanes.
“The new technology, the pat-downs, is just objectively safer for our traveling public,” Napolitano said. “We pick up contraband now, and we pick up more contraband with the new procedures and the new machinery. What we know is that you can’t measure the devices that we are deterring from going on a plane.”
It was a year ago on Christmas when a Nigerian man, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, was accused of trying to blow up a Northwest flight to Detroit with plastic explosives hidden in his underwear.
Despite concerns among civil libertarians and many travelers subjected to intimate pat-downs, Napolitano said safety is the No. 1 priority.
“Everything is objectively better than it was a year ago, particularly in the aviation environment,” she said.
Early Wednesday morning, a computer glitch shut down a security checkpoint for a couple of hours at Austin-Bergstrom International Airport. The line snaked out the door as many travelers waited for more than an hour and some missed their flights. One of the first people in line after that shutdown never made it through. She was arrested and banned from the airport.
Claire Hirschkind, 56, who says she is a rape victim and who has a pacemaker-type device implanted in her chest, says her constitutional rights were violated. She says she never broke any laws. But the Transportation Security Administration disagrees.
Hirschkind was hoping to spend Christmas with friends in California, but she never made it past the security checkpoint.
“I can’t go through because I have the equivalent of a pacemaker in me,” she said.
Hirschkind said because of the device in her body, she was led to a female TSA employee and three Austin police officers. She says she was told she was going to be patted down.
“I turned to the police officer and said, ‘I have given no due cause to give up my constitutional rights. You can wand me,’” and they said, ‘No, you have to do this,’” she said.
Hirschkind agreed to the pat down, but on one condition.
“I told them, ‘No, I’m not going to have my breasts felt,’ and she said, ’Yes, you are,’” said Hirschkind.
When Hirschkind refused, she says that ”the police actually pushed me to the floor, (and) handcuffed me. I was crying by then. They drug me 25 yards across the floor in front of the whole security.”
An ABIA spokesman says it is TSA policy that anyone activating a security alarm has two options. One is to opt out and not fly, and the other option is to subject themselves to an enhanced pat down. Hirschkind refused both and was arrested.
Other travelers KVUE talked to say they empathize with Hirschkind, but the law is the law.
“I understand her side of it, and their side as well, but it is for our protection so I have no problems with it,” said Gwen Washington, who lives in Killeen.
“It’s unfortunate that that happened and she didn’t get to fly home, but it makes me feel a little safer,” said Emily Protine.
The TSA did release a statement Wednesday that said in part, “Our officers are trained to treat all passengers with dignity and respect. Security is not optional.”
The TSA says less than three percent of travelers get a pat-down
Some moments have come to define this administration’s level of incompetence and detachment from reality. For Janet Napolitano of Homeland Security, the defining moment is when she claimed “the system worked” shortly after a man came within seconds of blowing up a commercial airliner having only been narrowly thwarted by other passengers. She soon retracted her statement, however the damage had essentially been done. Coming from the administration that referred to the wars as “overseas contingency operations” and terrorism as “man caused disasters,” it became clear that they cared more about process than substance. What was important to them was correctly completing arbitrary screenings as opposed to making sure that terrorism is thwarted. It’s really a typical liberal mindset: The intentions far outweigh the results. Practical real-world application of experience is replaced by academic experimentation.
Now comes the news that a man in Houston boarded a plane with a loaded pistol despite having gone through the TSA screening process:
Said the gun owner:
Houston businessman Farid Seif says it was a startling discovery. He didn’t intend to bring a loaded gun on a flight out of Houston and can’t understand how TSA screeners didn’t catch it.
“I mean, this is not a small gun,” Seif said. “It’s a .40 caliber gun.”
Unfortunately, this is par for the course.
From the ABC report:
Authorities tell ABC News the incident is not uncommon, but how often it occurs is a closely guarded government secret. Experts say every year since the September 11 attacks, federal agencies have conducted random, covert tests of airport security.
A person briefed on the latest tests tells ABC News the failure rate approaches 70 percent at some major airports. Two weeks ago, TSA’s new director said every test gun, bomb part or knife got past screeners at some airports.
So, after all of these calls for sacrifice in the name of security, it turns out that the TSA can’t do its job as well as a bouncer at a night club.
It serves as an example of why people like me are so incensed at the current state of TSA screenings. Pulling people aside and searching them is an excellent way to administer security; Pulling people aside at random to search them is security theater which does about the same amount as doing nothing. In fact, the only thing that these searches have over doing nothing is that a TSA agent might get to see a woman’s breasts.
If 70% failure rate even after completely depriving people of their right to privacy is the system working, then my car is about to get a lot more mileage.
The Transportation Security Administration has opened an investigation targeting John Tyner, the Oceanside man who left Lindbergh Field under duress on Saturday morning after refusing to undertake a full body scan.
Michael J. Aguilar, chief of the TSA office in San Diego, called a news conference at the airport Monday afternoon to announce the probe. He said the investigation could lead to prosecution and civil penalties of up to $11,000.
TSA agents had told Tyner on Saturday that he could be fined up to $10,000.
“That’s the old fine,” Aguilar said. “It has been increased.”
You know, the picture of Napolitano with the little mustache was taken off of Sunday’s post because a couple of people thought it was a little offensive. I was wrong to have done that–take down the picture, that is.
These people are sick!
“I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes.” Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776