54 Responses to TSA Fondles Women and Children Refusing Airport Naked Body Scanners
Get Updates by Email
Let’s Connect
Pages
The Latest
-
2012 Wishes for We Won't Fly
Alex Jones covers very uncomfortable description of the enhanced TSA groping. […]
More
Clearly the Leftist Mafia is discouraging us all from traveling by air while at the same time destroying the airline industry. The Lefties want to herd us all into urban compounds as groups of warring demographics while we descending into 3rd world status. Cute. We pay a lot of taxes for this.
Have you already forgotten about the guy that had explosives in his underwear?! If explovsives can’t be found by using a metal detector, what do you propose the TSA do? Maybe they should just ask everyone if they are carrying anything dangerous or if they are a terrorist. That might protect your right to privacy, but it won’t help my right to fly safely. And by the way, if you think the images from the scanners are pornographic, you need to get out more.
Hey Mike,
Would you like the TSA agents to laugh when you go through the full body scanners and find out that you have a penile implant, a catheter in your bladder, or a colostomy or that your wife or girlfriend has had a mastectomy?
If you don’t mind giving up your 4th amendment right for no probably cause, then be my guest. I, for one, prefer to maintain my right to privacy as an innocent, nonterrorist citizen ofthe US as the Constitution ensures.
Kara, why do you imagine agents will laugh? I fly a lot and I seer professionals trying to stop terrorists. If you have a better solution. Please propose it because I want to fly safely.
Profiling. The terrorists (such as those who flew planes into buildings) have a profile which doesn’t included little old ladies, etc. Unless you think nude photos of 12 year old girls (for example) will help you “fly safely?”
So, let the gov’t do anything for the sake of national security, right? Even if it violates one’s dignity and integrity? Why not justify body cavity searches, while we’re at it? After all, anyone can stuff an explosive up his anus, and it wouldn’t be detected by any of the current security methods.
Up for that?
We must be flying through different major airports then. Nothing against the TSA agents individually, but as a whole but they are low paid, and poorly trained for the responsibility assigned to them – and yes, I have seen many an agent on the “power trip” treating everyone going through security checkpoint as if they were scum on earth.
Thanks for that.
Kara,
Would you like it if some guy sneaks explosives on a plane by strapping it between his legs? If you come up with a better technology or system, please let us all know.
Mike…see above. And you have helped with the profile by defining “his” (i.e., male).
Why not justify body cavity searches, while we’re at it? After all, anyone can stuff an explosive up his anus, and it wouldn’t be detected by any of the current security methods.
Up for that?
I must agree with Mike and Steve on this. far to often do i see people like Kara, who have no security experience, talking about what we should or should not do to create a secure environment to protect people. Does it make some people feel uncomfortable? yes. But does that mean the majority should suffer? absolutely not. Now should we start making the majority suffer for things the minority think aren’t right, well then we are no better than the terrorists we are trying to stop. It is also my belief that before someone speaks about something, they should do a little research in the topic first.
It’s been shown (and proven) that the full body scanners actually do not detect any types of powder – which is the type of explosives that the Christmas Bomber had in his underwear. Technically, the TSA would have never caught him, even with the full on ‘enhanced’ pat-down.
Phia – would you mind revealing the source of your claim that the scanners can’t detect any types of powder? I buy that if you’re talking about some babypowder-type substance sprinkled around lightly. But, according to Wikipedia, the Christmas Bomber used the following: “The device consisted of a six-inch (15-cm) packet which was sewn into his underwear containing the explosive powder PETN, which became a plastic explosive when mixed with the high explosive triacetone triperoxide (TAPN) and a syringe containing liquid acid. Abdulmutallab created the explosive by mixing PETN with TAPN and other ingredients.” Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umar_Farouk_Abdulmutallab
I find it hard to believe a six inch long packet of stuff isn’t going to show up. To see just how big the package of stuff was, go here:
http://www.nefafoundation.org/miscellaneous/nefa_underwearbomb.pdf
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1951529,00.html
“One of the main criticisms of the scanners, which have already been installed at 19 airports in the U.S., is that they cannot detect low-density materials such as powders, liquids, thin pieces of plastic or anything that resembles skin. Nor can they detect any explosives concealed internally. Some politicians and aviation experts have questioned whether the scanners would have detected the powder that Abdulmutallab carried on board Northwest Flight 253.”
How convenient of you to leave out the following sentences from the same article:
“But proponents of the system disagree. Dutch Interior Minister Guusje ter Horst told a news conference last week that he believed the technology would have worked. “Our view now is that the use of millimeter-wave scanners would certainly have helped detect that he had something on his body, but you can never give 100% guarantees,” he said.”
So I’d say your “proof” that the scanners absolutely cannot detect the type of bomb materials used by Abdulmutallab is not rock solid.
Will they work all the time and in all situations? Unfortunately, probably not. So because there is a chance they won’t work in every case, let’s not use them at all — is that your thinking?
Here’s another article:
http://www.consumertraveler.com/columns/tsa-full-body-scanners-are-a-bust/comment-page-1/
And another:
http://www.dailytech.com/New+Full+Body+Scanners+Cant+Detect+Liquid+Explosives+Properly+say+Experts/article17279.htm
Very well — you’ve documented that the scanners likely won’t detect certain types of materials in all cases. Thanks for providing some level of documentation and proof (unike most of the other comments on this site).
So, what do you propose? What is your thought to my original question:
“So because there is a chance they won’t work in every case, let’s not use them at all — is that your thinking?”
And before you say that we shouldn’t use the scanners because they can’t detect PETN powder, consider this from the article you referenced:
“Either scanner can detect items such as metallic and nonmetallic weapons (guns, knives, box cutters, and even the Glock advanced synthetic polymer pistol) and dense explosives, some of which can’t be found through the use of metal detectors.”
Source: http://www.consumertraveler.com/columns/tsa-full-body-scanners-are-a-bust/comment-page-1/
Finally, one more comment from someone nowledgeable about security:
Chris Yates, Aviation Security Editor of Jane’s Information Group, says: “Body scanning (whether it be millimetre-wave or X-ray based and manufactured by any of the companies in this sector), has a significant role to play in enhancing UK airport security immediately.
Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/are-planned-airport-scanners-just-a-scam-1856175.html
Mike, the guy who had explosives in his underwear was stopped by passengers. The TSA didn’t save us from that guy. Passengers stopped the shoe bomber. Passengers stopped the terrorists on September 11th (granted, worst case scenario).
I’d trust my safety to my fellow passengers over the TSA any day of the week.
The passengers stopped the terrorists on Sept. 11th??? which plane? the one that hit the pentagon or the two planes that hit the twin towers? oh never mind, your talking about the one plane the crashed in the field in Pennsylvania. hmmm 1 out of 4? I really don’t like those odds, do you?
Mike – here is an interesting thought – these scanners were in place at the airport where the “underwear” bomber boarded his plane. So tell me, how are they helpful?
Justin – could you provide a bit of proof that the scanners were in use at Amsterdam’s Schiphol airport when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab got on the flight?
Here’s what I have found:
#1 – from the article “Body scanners blocked by US ‘could have prevented attempted plane attack’” on the Guardian web site:
“The US blocked Dutch attempts to install full-body scanners for passengers travelling to the US before the failed suicide bombing of a transatlantic flight on Christmas Day, the Dutch interior minister said today.
Authorities at Schipol airport in Amsterdam had wanted to introduce the devices to monitor US-bound flights, but the scanners were not installed because US authorities wanted them to be used on flights to all destinations, said Guusje Ter Horst”
Link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/30/body-scanners-blocked-us-netherlands
#2 – from the article “Christmas Incident Renews Scanner Debate” on CBS News web site:
“Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian accused of trying to ignite explosives aboard a Northwest Airlines jet as it was coming in for a landing in Detroit, did not go through such a scan where his flight began, at Amsterdam’s Schiphol airport.”
Link: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/12/29/national/main6032424.shtml
#3 – I also emailed a reporter from the Times Picayune newspaper named David Hammer who had recently written an article about the scanner controversy and asked him if he knew if scanners were in use in Amsterdam. His reply was that they were not.
I await your reply with evidence of your claim.
Actually, it looks like I misread the comment that “…the scanners were not installed…” to imply that they were on site but not used/installed.
I will retract my argument on that point then.
“Maybe they should just ask everyone if they are carrying anything dangerous. . .”
This is what they ask you when you check-in at the counter before your flight.
Snark – actually they don’t ask you anything at the check in counter. I’ve checked in on 6 flights in the last month or so. Other than checking my ID, there is no security questioning at the check in counter. In fact, you can now check in online and print your boarding pass. And if you don’t have luggage to check, you can go right to security, bypassing the check in counter completely.
Hey all,
I appreciate what you are doing. I also wanted to add that one of the most problematic aspects of the “enhanced pat-downs” is the potential re-traumatization of sexual assault victims. Huge numbers of American citizens have suffered sexual abuse, and subjecting them to violations is likely psychologically destructive.
The next logical step is digital bodily cavity searches.
That is absolutely correct, as an assasination attempt in Saudi involved an explosive in a body cavity.
Stand by for the next step in “security:” the-prison-drop-your trousers-bend-over-and-spread’em inspection.
One truly wonders about the TSA goons. How can they have any self-respect when all they do is grope old people, children, the infirm and the able-bodied.
well perhaps you should also ask police officers and prison guards the same question, because they have to do the same thing. Granted it’s not as frequent as the so called TSA “goons” but it is still a part of their jobs.
Snark – why to you generalize and call all the TSA employees “goons”? Do you think they all really enjoy patting down complete strangers? Or perhaps they are doing it because 1) it is their job and they have been told to do it — and they like many of the rest of us really need our job. or 2) because it helps improve safety
Great article,
I’ve got an idea to accelerate the effectiveness of your campaign.
Focus your efforts by making an example of ONE airline:
I think results would be faster if your group called the Public/Media Relations of one airline and informed them that “Since every individual airline is complying with this intrusive policy but hiding under the indenity of ‘The Airline Industry As A Whole’, and since we can’t tackle the entire industry, we’re going to boycott ONLY YOUR AIRLINE.” Then, send out a press release: Airline “X” to pay the price for bowing to authority.
This would have several advantages:
1. We the people can protest, but still fly. This is an easy form of protest to make that won’t keep people from meeting their travel needs.
2. You’ll instill panic in the target airline. “Wait, why us? Everyone else is doing it?” “Why not you? We can’t afford to go after everyone else.”
3. The press will have a field day watching & reporting the war between We The People and “Airline X”
4. Offer no terms of compromise or interest in communication: “We are serious about our rights. Any cooperation in infringing upon any one of our rights is tantamount to attacking ALL of our rights. Our goal, therfore, is to SHUT YOU DOWN PERMANENTLY. We will stop when we see the machines removed from all of your gates on TV.
5. When the company cedes to your demands, put out the word to your people that it’s now ok to fly with Airline X–then move on to Airline Y.
6. If the company doesn’t cooperate, your strike will gain momentum as more and more media become interested.
7. The pilots and the unions of the airline are already on your side. They will likely join a strike with you when things heat up.
8. If you actually do shut down an airline–pick the weakest one–the resulting unemployment will further fuel your cause.
9. Once one airline shuts down, the rest will reverse course instantly.
10. Have fun with this. Nothing is funnier than making an opponent beg for “middle ground” so he can try talk you into giving up your cause.
11. Do not correspond with the airlines at all–let them read about what you’re doing in your newspaper press releases.
We should also target the hub airports for the target airline. Evidently, using the TSA instead of a private security firm is a choice that individual airports can opt out of. (Who knew?)
If I have to drive further, but can book travel through a couple of alternative airports that won’t irradiate or grope my wife and kids, that’s the itinerary I am going to choose. Otherwise we’re staying home or driving. I’ll bet there are a lot of people who feel similarly and that’s some powerful financial incentive right there.
Seriously, are “we” really that afraid to let Big Brother see a digitally-barely-recognizable-image of your Little Brother? Only a twisted mind would think that a technology that at its core is designed to save lives would be used for “porn” and “fondling”. Shake yourself man. Civil disobedience doesn’t usually mean making innocent holiday travelers suffer. Focus on something else.
You just don’t get it …..so sad …..either that or you work for the tsa .
Brooks – so then what is your proposal for stopping the bad guys and not interfering with your rights?
So true. Anyone who does not see how invasive this is must be have no respect for those who have been sexually assaulted. How can anyone say that it is ok for someone to look at your wife, mother, daughter, father, brother, etc- NAKED- against their will? These scanners are not helping protect us. They are just lining pockets. Using K-9 teams to search bags and even passengers would be far more effective and would save costs. But our government is obviously concerned about spending more money that we don’t have!
I travel with my toddler to visit Grandma. So far we have been checked for drugs (his shoes, my hands, his hands and hair), and I have to have him walk through on his own. This body scanning is a parent’s nightmare. If you try to put him in there alone, he will get scared. Not to mention there will be a time when he will be alone and I wont be able to see if someone tries to grab him or something. If you pat him down, he will fight as he does not like strangers touching him – neither do I. Plus the issues with the xrays themselves. I was planning a trip out right after Thanksgiving. I’ve changed my plans.
I like the scanners because they create a convenience. With consent I am ok that TSA takes pictures of me. They don’t contain any information that identifies me.
The issue is traveling with children. Their parents have authority too. Their expectations of me are reasonable and basic:
1. Don’t allow pictures to be taken naked.
2. Don’t allow strangers to touch them.
Wonder if the sexual assault is punishment of Erin Chase for bringing baby formula through the airport:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/chase-e1.1.1.html
I had a terrible experience at DIA, the same airport involved with the Alex Jones Staff member. I was putting my 90 year old amputee and wheel chair bound mother on the plane for her annual trip to spend the winter in FLA. The chemical sniffer detected something, and from that point on, she and I were treated horribly. They made my mother get out of her wheelchair so they could search her thoroughly. Read again, this is a frail 90 year old amputee. She was left on a hard surface bench without her proper cushion because they wanted to examin it as well, for over 30 minutes. I am a rehab doc; 30 minutes on a hard surface for a person with at risk skin, is enough to cause a ducubitus ulcer that will never heal. She was finally asked if she had gone to the restroom before coming through security- when she said yes, the screening staff said, “Oh thats it then, the soap in the restrooms reacts to the chemical sniffer- happens all the time.” This ordeal went on for nearly an hour. Since that incident, I champion anyone that wants massive changes in the TSA proceedures.
Terrible story, but if you were a real doc, you’d know it’s spelled “decubitus”
This is not going to happen to my grandchild!
Two 2:00 minutes in on:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdS5bBftdsg
Sorry, but I am as Liberal as they come and these scanners are dangerous joke and the groping is a violation of my 4th amendment rights. The ACLU is against these machines and the alternative “virtually strip-searched or endure a really aggressive grope.” http://www.aclu.org/blog/technology-and-liberty/tsa-meets-resistance-new-pat-down-procedures Don’t blame the left for this, this is a corporation making money on fear.
It’s time to call for Janet Napolitano’s resignation. Let’s get everyone involve. Please THOUSANDS call and email our congressman and the White House today and let them know she is allowing TSA to grope and touch American travellers including children inappropriately.
Fed Up.
You can call for anyone’s resignation you chose but it is my firm brief, especially since there are misinformed, undereducated people in this country who believe that they are more safe with out security scanners and hand pats searching for weapons and explosives, That we should institute something that our founding fathers were smart enough to include in the constitution. And that would be a little thing called martial law. and for those of you who don’t know what that is, look it up.
Miles – it is true that passengers helped stop the underwear bomber and thank god they took the quick action they did. But when you say “I’d trust my safety to my fellow passengers over the TSA any day of the week”, what if your fellow passenger sitting beside the next underwear bomber is a 90 year old lady not capable of subduing the bomber. Or the bomber does his thing when everyone is asleep on an overnight flight. Or, unlike Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab — who clearly botched the detonation of the device — the next guy is actually good a setting off the bomb.
Given today’s environment, everyone needs to do their part. But saying we can rely solely on the traveling public to keep us safe is like saying we don’t need police to catch the bad guys.
I wonder how victims and survivors of sexual assault feel about others observing their bodies, and if they opt out, how do they feel about people touching their bodies?
Phia – I would image it is a very difficult situation for sexual assault victims and it is very unfortuate they have to go through it. But we shouldn’t lessen our security procedures, which have the objective of keeping us all safe, because of it.
Then at least take the ones that have been sexually assaulted off of the list to be checked. For some, the intimate touching may be too much and remind them of their trauma, as well as believing that they are not in control of their bodies anymore.
So then sexual assult victims would have to declare (and I suppose prove) they have been sexually assulted. Not sure how many of them would like to do that. Talk about an invasion of privacy…
Then of course you’d have the issue of a would be terrorist claiming to have been sexually assulted in the past to avoid security screening.
Why is this even a a topic of discussion? The right to be “secure in one’s person” is fundamental to our constitution and the basic philosophy upon which the nation was formed. How to get sexual assault victims to “just deal with it,” or making them recall their abuse… these are crazy avenues of discussion.
I appreciate that the objective of the policies and technology is principally to make us safe, but there must be a line beyond which we will refuse a measure of safety to have security in our liberties and dignity. We are a clever nation, we can find another way. The Israelis have rejected this, and they have the risk like no other nation on earth.
We were saving for a big Disney vacation with the kids but I don’t want to have them suffer through an enhanced pat-down (gate rape) just to get there. Maybe next year when I have more time to drive down to FL.
I encourage you to stick with your plans to take your kids to Disney. I took mine last month and it was a great trip. If you’re worried about “gate rape” send them through the scanners!
…so they can all get skin cancer, great idea!
It is time to kick out the TSA, because they have never caught a single terrorist. Legally, every airport has the right to do so, since it’s more than 2 years since the TSA was founded, as stipulated in the original bill that founded the TSA.
[...] I don’t usually agree with Alex Jones, but I link you for completeness : http://wewontfly.com/tsa-fondles-women-children [...]