National Opt-Out Day Against Virtual Strip Searches 647
An anonymous reader writes in about a protest called for the busiest airline travel day of the year. "An activist opposed to the new invasive body scanners in use at airports around the country just designated Wednesday, Nov. 24 as a National Opt-Out Day. He's encouraging airline passengers to decline the TSA's technological strip searches en masse on that day as a protest against the scanners, as well as the new 'enhanced pat-downs' inflicted on refuseniks. 'The goal of National Opt-Out Day is to send a message to our lawmakers that we demand change,' reads the call to action at OptOutDay.com, set up by Brian Sodegren. 'No naked body scanners, no government-approved groping. We have a right to privacy, and buying a plane ticket should not mean that we're guilty until proven innocent.' The US Airline Pilots Association and other pilot groups have urged their members to avoid the scanners and have also condemned the new pat-down policy as humiliating to pilots. They've advised pilots who don't feel comfortable undergoing pat-downs in front of passengers to request they be conducted in a private room. Any pilots who don't feel comfortable after undergoing a pat-down have been encouraged to 'call in sick and remove themselves from the trip.'"
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Be safer than sorry when it comes to cancer (Score:5, Interesting)
Why just do this on one day only when you can make this your default choice? I'd rather be safe than sorry when it comes to cancer. And I dont much like being treated like a naughty child by the TSA or whoever either.
so what's to prevent (Score:3, Interesting)
People from simply removing all of their clothing when they are "hand searched"? Or demanding that a LEO be present at the search? Or demanding that the search be video'd? If the search is "public", then can someone tape it? Or getting the name of the employees who search you?
By the way, where did that 'bagger come from from up thread? What a parrot.... Prove a negative, indeed....
Re:The privacy/security scale tips again. (Score:1, Interesting)
Security Theater Showdown (Score:1, Interesting)
As much as this is so very much needed in the U.S., and other countries that practice this farce of security, in reality I doubt the call to refuse won't be in the minds of the majority that only think of getting to point B. I'm sure that the powers that be realize this and know that is what is going through most peoples minds as they get ready to board a plane. "Gotta get to point B, no matter what the cost or seemingly minor inconvenience of the loss privacy.". If it was me, and I was a U.S. citizen, I would be having all sorts of fun making their job as unpleasant as possible. Soon as they start screaming "Opt-out!!", I'd do that too. "Hey everybody I'm an opt-out! I'M AN OPT-OUT! Look at me, I don't want to go through the scanner!" As a man, I'd ask for a woman to pat me down. I know how well that will go over with the goons. So, I'd probably get a guy. Since he's going to be touching me in places he shouldn't may as well ask him to milk my prostate while he's at it. Make it more uncomfortable for him than it is for me. Just some suggestions for those who have to go through this bullshit.
I bet there won't be more than 5% that refuse the scanners, and insist or refuse the pat down. Any takers? Place your bets now as to the % of people who refuse scanners
Re:Conservative issue too. (Score:5, Interesting)
Perhaps the new motto ought to be: Land of the sheep, home of the scared?
US paranoia has reached an incredible level. Yesterday I was in Madrid Barajas airport to travel to Liverpool, and there were automatic announcements advising passengers should turn up at the gate for US-bound flights an hour and a half before the boarding time of the aircraft to make it though enhanced security. If you have luggage to check I suspect you now have to turn up at the airport 3.5 to 4 hours before the actual departure time for a US bound flight.
Wait until Japanese here about a new pat-down (Score:1, Interesting)
HOW TO END TSA NONSENSE AND BE A GOOD AMERICAN! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The privacy/security scale tips again. (Score:3, Interesting)
You're correct. That it what it would meant to _most_ people.
To _rational_ people, it means the TSA approach is not working, We should try something else, like psychological screening. Israel uses it with relatively great results. I have no problem answering a few questions about where I was and where I'm going
http://www.japantoday.com/category/commentary/view/psychology-not-just-technology-needed-for-airport-security
Re:Security Theater Showdown (Score:5, Interesting)
Make it more uncomfortable for him than it is for me. Just some suggestions for those who have to go through this bullshit.
When you come back from your "pat-down" be sure to tell all the other passengers to ask for *that* particular screener, because he give excellent hand-jobs. See how red you can make him turn.
Re:The privacy/security scale tips again. (Score:4, Interesting)
"We haven't had a genuine terror attack in a long time".
A genuine terror attack is one that fills you with terror. It has very little to do with the convictions of the perpetrator.
There's no such thing as a "terrorist".
Not a single one on the planet.
Terrorism is a stratagem, not a political philosophy.
It's like calling the WW II Germans "Blitzkriegers", or the Americans "Amphibians".
"respecting laws that were put in place to keep us safe"?
But what if I think these laws address the wrong issue's, and only serve to create an illusion of safety against an ill-defined opponent?
Re:HOW TO END TSA NONSENSE AND BE A GOOD AMERICAN! (Score:5, Interesting)
Put your children in T-shirts that say "The Federal Government is afraid of me" or "The government thinks I'm a terrorist."
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The privacy/security scale tips again. (Score:4, Interesting)
people start getting indignant about security again
People aren't indigant over security - They're indignant over "security theatre," with billions spent for questionable returns.
For me, the big deal is not that some poor security guard has to look at my fat gut or grope my privates. For me, the issue is that this is a *tremendous* waste of money for little return - Money that desperately needs to be spent elsewhere. The days of terrorists smuggling explosives onto planes on their body is over. The recent "Yemen" incident points to this - The threat to airlines is the same issue that security experts have been telling us about for 20 years: Air freight. If you're on a plane, chances are you've been screened 100X more than what may be in the cargo hold under your feet. These nude-o-scopes do nothing to address that. However, addressing the issue of air freight is very complex and expensive and doesn't easily demonstrate to Ma and Pa Kettle that goshdarnit, the government's doing something - Whereas visibly putting a brown man in a turban into a scanning phonebooth thingamajiggy does.
Finally, if you *are* legitimately concerned about items being smuggled onto a plane on a passenger's person, you only need to talk to a prison guard or Israeli security expert to learn how useless these nude-o-scopes are, as they don't look *inside* the body, which is where most contraband is hidden these days anyway.
Re:The privacy/security scale tips again. (Score:3, Interesting)
scapegoat alert.
easy excuse but its bullshit. the muslims can't even get along with themselves; they don't need to (and should not be) blaming others when they need to fix major problems in their own culture.
its just too easy to blame 'the outside'. their leaders use this excuse to their own people but we're supposed to be more enlightened in the west and more free in our thoughts. why, then, do we also fall for the obviously-bogus exuse of 'its all israel and the jews' faults!' ?
muslims have been taught to hate jews. its somewhat like southerners back 100 years ago in US history. we know race hatred in the US. just think of this when you hear about arab countries blaming 'the infidels'. its just another version of scapegoating just like the deep south did in the US.
Re:The privacy/security scale tips again. (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree that there are more troublesome procedures than "locking the door", but it was just an example for something that does not appear to have any direct benefit, can annoy (some) people and only with the knowledge we have now do we understand its importance. I was just illustrating the point that the OP's request for a "list of terrorist captured by the TSA" is not a useful benchmark for the effectiveness of a procedure, because, as you pointed out, the "lock the door" directive is very helpful while not catching any terrorist.
Re:Flying != basic human right. (Score:5, Interesting)
Flying isn't a right but being secure in our persons from unwarranted and intrusive searches is.
All of the people who have ever died on a plane, from mechanical problems and pilot error as well as terrorism, doesn't even add up to a single years worth of drunk driving fatalities. I would bet that you still willingly get in a private car so you're only fooling yourself. Airline security is already good enough that further encroachments to our actual, enumerated, rights are not necessary.
Re:The privacy/security scale tips again. (Score:4, Interesting)
How about instead of restricting and violating our own citizens over this, we go out and find al Queda wherever they happen to be, and kill them all? I mean, supposedly the US is this horrible imperialistic country which thinks nothing of killing poor innocent foreign civilians... how about we start taking advantage of that? Quit tiptoeing around the Pakistani government and send the entire US army into the border area with an ROE of "shoot anything that moves that ain't ours". If there's caves, fill 'em with poison gas (remember supposedly the US violates the Geneva conventions all the time ANYWAY). If there's objections from the Pakistani government, nuke Karachi. Same for anywhere else terrorists might be hanging out, and that includes Saudi Arabia, Iran and Syria.
No? There are some things that the US government shouldn't do, even for the laudable goal of stopping terrorist attacks? Well, then perhaps invasive airport security scans are one of them too.
Re:The privacy/security scale tips again. (Score:3, Interesting)
Have you traveled in Israel? The security procedure works perfectly (so far), but it requires at least 45 minutes more than the US system and would cost a lot more. The questions are also extremely probing and personal.
If you can't handle the thought of someone seeing you nude, then I'd fully support having the option of an Israeli-style interrogation. I have a feeling you'll feel a lot more "invaded" after the interrogation than the body scan, though. You'll forget the body scan in a few minutes, but you'll never forget your travel through Israel.
Re:The privacy/security scale tips again. (Score:3, Interesting)
For my job, once I was charged with putting together war game scenarios. In one imaginary game I created, I had a 'terrorist' group completely controlled by another 'imaginary country'. In the situation, the terrorist group destroyed a target of supreme U.S. importance. Our country spent the next 10 years fighting this 'terrorist' group. In the process we virtually bankrupted the country, and eroded all the freedoms that we were supposedly fighting for. In the end it was revealed who the real country controlling the terrorist group was. However at that point the imaginary country in question had just had 10 years of incredible economic and technological expansion. It was literally too strong to fight. The scenario planned to be kind of like the "Kobayashi Maru" scenario in Star Trek 2 the wrath of Kahn, where our little ship puts up a last ditch noble fight in the face of sure death in the hands of overwhelming odds.
However, at the time my superiors decided that my scenario was too unrealistic. Instead we had to keep fighting the imaginary terrorist organization.
--All wars are at their heart economic wars, and sometimes the enemies are not always overseas.
Re:Flying != basic human right. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Yep, there are four things to do (Score:1, Interesting)
In the case of the first option - Refuse to Fly, you CAN exert pressure on your employer. NOWHERE in any employment contract that I have see can an employer FORCE you to consent to having "nearly naked" images taken of you, force you to be repeatedly exposed to harmful radiation, or force you to be sexually molested. In fact, in ALL of these "options", employees have taken their employers to court & won substantial, punitive awards.
So why should we expect any different ? Please recall, that these people who have had these humiliating & horrible experiences have DONE NOTHING WRONG. This is simply another example of a knee-jerk reaction by a Government Agency, doing whatever they please under the veil of "protecting Americans from Terrorism". It astounds em that they can violate the civil rights of Americans with these remarkably ineffective methods.
Vote with your feet, people. Choose alternative means of transportation - rail, car, ship, whatever. When the airline industry (which employs hundreds of thousands of Americans) is crippled, they can then go & deal with having this Draconian Agency dismantled. The ripple effect goes around the world. Airlines & security companies at European & Asian airports are also complaining that the TSA demands over THEIR security regulations violate the rights of NON-American passengers.
Re:The privacy/security scale tips again. (Score:4, Interesting)
An Israeli security expert like Rafi Sela, who told the Canadian Parliament that the strip search machines are "useless".
"Sela, former chief security officer of the Israel Airport Authority and a 30-year veteran in airport security and defence technology, helped design the security at Ben Gurion." [vancouversun.com]
Re:Simplified sound bites (Score:4, Interesting)
A dermatologist might very well need to see every inch of you.
Although when I went to a new dermatologist and he asked me to strip my response was, "I'd prefer not to."
He shrugged, said 'ok', and just examined me above the waist.
(don't ask what I was wearing below the waist.. lets just say I hadn't planned on a full body examination for a neck issue)
Re:The pilot thing shows how stupid it really is (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't see why there is a security check for pilots at all. I mean we want to carefully check their identity, we want to make sure that they are who they say they are of course. However after their ID has been established, they should be allowed to go on about their business with no more check. Why? Because such a check is totally worthless. Pilots have hands on the controls of the aircraft, they could crash it and kill all aboard if they wanted.
As a counterpoint, pilots frequently 'deadhead', or ride in a jumpseat from one airport to another so that they can get to the particular plane that they're supposed to fly. In such cases, the pilot is no more than a passenger, albeit one paid by the airline to fly - they do not have their hands on the controls of that plane. Furthermore, a pilot who flies a cargo-only prop-based puddlejumper may be deadheading on a 787, so the fact that they'll eventually have their hands on the controls of a plane may be irrelevant.
That said, yes, it's all security theater.
Body Scanning Machines (Score:3, Interesting)
I do not fly anymore, because from what my friends tell me, if a TSA agent did some of the things that are patently criminal to half the guys crotches and ladies breasts, I would give the individual a knuckle sandwich.
After which they arrest me, I would try to do the same to the pompous judge who fined me.
There is absolutely no way I am going through a body scanner, unless they put a bullet between my eyes.
Then they can willy nilly my corpse through the thing as many times as they want.
-Hack
Re:ALWAYS OPT-OUT - for your health (Score:3, Interesting)
Here is the FDA's response to the letter. http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationEmittingProductsandProcedures/SecuritySystems/ucm231857.htm [fda.gov]