Welcome to the Net Muslims Forums.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 43

Thread: TSA Rants

  1. #21
    Administrator Array
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    21° 30' N, 39° 10' E

  2. #22
    Moderator Array
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Where I'm comfortable


    10 of the Most Outrageous TSA Horror Stories

    "The strong is not the one who overcomes the people by strength, but the strong is the one who controls himself while in anger." (Sahih Al Bukhari Vol 8. No.135)

  3. #23
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Big Sis Caught Lying To American People

    Steve Watson - November 15th, 2010

    Homeland Security head Janet Napolitano, now forever known as Big Sis – a reference to George Orwell’s 1984 – has been caught telling some big lies in an attempt to quell an enormous public backlash against the full body scanning technology and invasive pat-down procedures that have been implemented by the TSA in airports nationwide.

    In a blatant propaganda piece published by USA Today, Napolitano describes the scanning machines as safe and the pat-downs as “discreet”, in the face of a flood of complaaints from scientists, pilots, flight attendants, privacy groups, parents, Muslim groups and everyday passengers, all rebelling against over the top security.

    “AIT machines are safe, efficient, and protect passenger privacy.” Napolitano writes in an article in which every single claim she makes can be easily disproved and revealed to be outright lies.

    Lie: The scanners are safe

    “They have been independently evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, who have all affirmed their safety.” Napolitano claims, expecting the public to simply swallow the claim that NIST and the FDA are somehow “independent” of the federal government.

    As for Johns Hopkins University declaring the scanners safe, tell it to Dr Michael Love, who runs an X-ray lab at the department of biophysics and biophysical chemistry at the Johns Hopkins school of medicine. Love told AFP two days ago that “statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays”.

    “…we have a situation at the airports where people are so eager to fly that they will risk their lives in this manner,” he added.

    So, unless you count skin cancer as safe, Napolitano is lying to you.

    According to other numerous real “independent” scientists who continue to speak out over the health hazards associated with the x-ray technology, the body scanners are far from safe.

    John Sedat, a University of California at San Francisco professor of biochemistry and biophysics and member of the National Academy of Sciences tells CNet that the machines have “mutagenic effects” and will increase the risk of cancer. Sedat previously sent a letter to the White House science Czar John P. Holdren, identifying the specific risk the machines pose to children and the elderly.

    The letter stated:

    “it appears that real independent safety data do not exist… There has not been sufficient review of the intermediate and long-term effects of radiation exposure associated with airport scanners. There is good reason to believe that these scanners will increase the risk of cancer to children and other vulnerable populations.”

    The TSA has repeatedly stated that going through the machines is equal to the radiation encountered during just two minutes of a flight. However, this does not take into account that the scanning machines specifically target only the skin and the muscle tissue immediately beneath.

    The scanners are similar to C-Scans and fire ionizing radiation at those inside which penetrates a few centimeters into the flesh and reflects off the skin to foorm a naked body image.

    The firing of ionizing radiation at the body effectively “unzips” DNA, according to scientific research by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

    The research shows that even very low doses of X-ray can delay or prevent cellular repair of damaged DNA, yet pregnant women and children will be subjected to the process as new guidelines including scanners are adopted.

    The Inter-Agency Committee on Radiation Safety concluded in their report on the matter that governments must justify the use of the scanners and that a more accurate assessment of the health risks is needed.

    Pregnant women and children should not be subject to scanning, according to the report, adding that governments should consider “other techniques to achieve the same end without the use of ionizing radiation.”

    “The Committee cited the IAEA’s 1996 Basic Safety Standards agreement, drafted over three decades, that protects people from radiation. Frequent exposure to low doses of radiation can lead to cancer and birth defects, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,” reported Bloomberg.

    Scientists at Columbia University also entered the debate recently, warning that the dose emitted by the naked x-ray devices could be up to 20 times higher than originally estimated, likely contributing to an increase in a common type of skin cancer called basal cell carcinoma which affects the head and neck.

    “If all 800 million people who use airports every year were screened with X-rays then the very small individual risk multiplied by the large number of screened people might imply a potential public health or societal risk. The population risk has the potential to be significant,” said Dr David Brenner, head of Columbia University’s centre for radiological research.

    Lie: The scanners are effective

    “…the weapons and other dangerous and prohibited items we’ve found during AIT screenings have illustrated their security value time and again.” Napolitano claims in her propaganda piece.

    In reality, the machines would not have prevented the Christmas Day bomber from boarding Flight 253, according to their designers, and other security experts who have dismissed the devices as “useless”.

    The imaging machines cannot even detect explosive material, so claiming, as Napolitano does, that they are “our best defense against such threats” is misleading at best and at worst a complete lie.

    If the machines had detected “dangerous items” “time and again”, rest assured that the DHS and the TSA would make sure it was all over the news – such success stories have been decidedly absent from the media, unless you count “dangerous items” as baby milk, tubes of toothpaste or contact lens fluid.

    The idea that the machines are effective flies in the face of the viewpoint of surveillance experts who note that the scanners will do nothing to make air travel safer.

    Lie: The scanners cannot store/print/transmit images

    At first we were asked to believe that the imaging machines did not produce crisp images of naked bodies.

    In an effort to downplay the intrusion of privacy they really represent, the TSA routinely claimed that the images produced by the scanners are “ghostly” or “skeletal”.

    The passenger’s face is blurred and the image as a whole “resembles a fuzzy negative,” the TSA spokeswoman Kristin Lee told the media last year, prior to the underwear bombing attempt.

    After months of researchers, reporters and everyday travelers outing this as a complete lie, the DHS/TSA abandoned that approach and instead claimed that, although they were detailed naked images, it’s fine and dandy because they cannot be saved or transmitted.

    “The imaging technology that we use cannot store, export, print or transmit images.” Napolitano claims in her latest propaganda piece.

    Again not true. As we have previously detailed, the images that show in detail the naked genitals of men, women and children that have passed through the scanners can be transmitted and printed.

    As reported by Declan McCullagh of CNET earlier this year, “The U.S. Marshals Service admitted this week that it had surreptitiously saved tens of thousands of images recorded with a millimeter wave system at the security checkpoint of a single Florida courthouse.”

    The proof comes in the foorm of a letter (PDF), obtained by The Electronic Privacy Infoormation Center (EPIC), in which William Bordley, an associate general counsel with the Marshals Service, admits that “approximately 35,314 images…have been stored on the Brijot Gen2 machine” used in the Orlando, Fla. federal courthouse.

    EPIC says it has also obtained more than 100 images of electronically stripped individuals from the scanning devices used at federal courthouses. The disclosures come as part of a settlement of an EPIC Freedom of Infoormation Act lawsuit against the U.S. Marshals Service.

    Brijot, the manufacturer of the body scanning equipment in question, also admits that its machine can store up to 40,000 images and records.

    EPIC, has filed two further lawsuits against the Department of Homeland Security over the scanners, claiming that the DHS has refused to release at least 2,000 images it has stored from scanners currently in use in U.S. airports.

    EPIC’s lawsuit argues that the body scanners violate the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits “unreasonable” searches, as well as the Privacy Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, referencing religious laws about modesty.

    The group points to a further document (PDF) it has obtained from DHS showing that the machines used by the department’s TSA are not only able to record and store naked body images, but that they are mandated to do so.

    The TSA has admitted that this is the case, but claims that it is for training and testing purposes only, maintaining that the body scanners used at airports cannot “store, print or transmit images”.

    “In complying with our Freedom of Infoormation Act request, the Marshals Service has helped the public more fully understand the capabilities of these devices,” EPIC President Marc Rotenberg said in a statement. “But the DHS continues to conceal the truth from American air travelers who could be subject to similar intrusive recorded searches in U.S. airports.”

    As if it was needed, further evidence also points to the fact that the images are actively being transmitted and printed in airports.

    Lie: Pat-downs are “discreet”

    In her headline, Napolitano calls the pat-down procedure offered as an alternative to the naked body scanners, or used in addition to them, as “discreet”.

    “Pat-downs have long been one of the many security measures used by the U.S. and countries across the world to make air travel as secure as possible.” she writes.

    What she does not explain is that the new pat down procedure, which now allows TSA agents to forcefully feel around breasts and genitalia, is currently conducted in full view of queuing passengers and has been described by many, including New York Times reporter Joe Sharkey, as a deliberate foorm of humiliation to discourage others from refusing the full body scans.

    The TSA also claims that the pat-downs are discreet, yet multiple accounts and reports prove otherwise.

    Flight attendants and pilots unions in particular have taken up issue with the pat-downs, with one union declaring “We don’t want them in unifoorm going through this enhanced screening where their private areas are being touched in public… They actually make contact with the genital area.”

    As reported by Reuters, parents are now demanding that the procedures be changed for children, after witnesses have described their children’s genitals being touched by men and women working for the TSA.

    “I didn’t think it was going to be as horrible as he was describing,” one father noted after an agent told him what he was going to do to the child before conducting the full body search.

    “At some point the terrorists have won.” the father added. The TSA says it is currently “reviewing” the procedure for children. Perhaps it should first review it’s policy on background checking its own employees, which by all accounts is woefully inadequate.

    Lie: “Risk scriiptd” security procedure

    Napolitano calls the TSA’s system “risk-scriiptd,” another total fallacy given the fact that the primary targets of airport oppression have been women, children, the elderly, and the physically disabled, all the categories of people who characteristically would pose the least risk in terms of terrorism.

    The procedure is completely random, emphasizing the fact that everyone is categorized as a potential terrorist.

    Lie: The scanners are popular with the public

    “These machines are now in use at airports nationwide, and the vast majority of travelers say they prefer this technology to alternative screening measures.” Napolitano writes.

    Another unsubstantiated claim, particularly given that a new Reuters poll shows that over 95% of Americans are now less likely to fly due to the crackdown in the wake of the dubious toner cartridge and underpants bombing scares.

    Furthermore, documents released under the Freedom of Infoormation Act before the issue recently hit headlines again, and before the majority of airports even had the machines installed, have revealed that there were more than 600 foormal complaaints about the devices last year.

    Hardly a shining example of how popular the machines are.

    Lies Lies Lies

    Napolitano and the TSA have consistently lied to the American people about the open implementation of tyranny in our airports. They will continue to do so in an effort to make it appear that those who are revolting against their procedures are just a small minority, when in reality the the vast majority of sick and tired of being treated like slaves and having their fundamental freedoms trashed.

    On November 24th, ‘national opt-out day’, the world will see thousands and thousands standing up against measures that are not only set to become commonplace in airports everywhere, but are also scheduled to be implemented on our streets if we do not resist.

    OptOutDay.com declares:

    It’s the day ordinary citizens stand up for their rights, stand up for liberty, and protest the federal government’s desire to virtually strip us naked or submit to an “enhanced pat down” that touches people’s breasts and genitals. You should never have to explain to your children, “Remember that no stranger can touch or see your private area, unless it’s a government employee, then it’s OK.”

    The goal of National Opt Out Day is to send a message to our lawmakers that we demand change. 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 issue has garnered such massive attention, largely due to coverage via The Drudge Report, that the federal government has been forced to declare it is considering scrapping the enhanced security procedures for pilots and flight attendants. The unified statements from pilots and flight attendants unions highlights the fact that coming together and declaring a mass refusal to submit to this can be effective, it is vital that it not be overlooked.

    Attached Files

  4. #24
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    TSA S&M (Sadism and Masochism or Slave and Master)

    All this airport groping doesn’t make anyone safer. But that may not be the point.

    By the time you read this, the Thanksgiving holiday will be over, and the state of the debate over porn machines and pat-downs—a.k.a. the TSA’s new and wildly controversial airport screening procedures—may have shifted from where it stood beforehand. Perhaps the National Opt-Out Day protest will have backfired or merely fizzled. Perhaps the TSA will have managed to escape the long weekend without creating any more priceless don’t-touch-my-junk YouTube moments. Perhaps the public outcry against the enhanced-security regime will be slowly receding, like Turkey Day itself, into our collective rearview mirror.

    Certainly that’s the outcome the Obama administration is hoping for—and, indeed, expecting.
    Last week, as the president’s people pushed back hard against criticisms of the new full-body scanners and heavy-petting pat-downs, they were also arguing that the degree of outrage had been exaggerated, the product of a slow news week and the media’s ravenous appetite for any semi-respectable excuse for talking about genitalia. And certainly history suggests that the Obamans may be right. In the years since 9/11, every incremental increase in transportation security, no matter how ridiculous or reactive, has been met with the same response: initial grumbling followed by grudging acquiescence.

    But this time has been different, to put it mildly, and different in ways that suggest the furor will not soon be fading. Out of nowhere, what’s emerged is a remarkable political backlash, driven both by populist chagrin and elite disapproval, uniting the civil-libertarian left, the anti-government right, and the technocratic center.
    Important congressmen of both parties have written letters to TSA chief John Pistole to express concern about and suggest modifications to the new procedures. And although support for those procedures started high, it appears to be falling fast.

    It’s possible that I’ll come to regret this prediction, but here goes: Between now and Christmas, the administration and the TSA will cave. This in itself would be a real victory, since the new protocols are genuinely demeaning and largely pointless exercises in what the security guru Bruce Schneier calls “security theater.” But if we’re lucky—and it’s a very big if, I’ll grant you—the entire episode may serve an even greater purpose: to start an adult conversation about the policies we adopt to reduce the risk of terrorist incidents in this country, and the foolishness of believing that any of them will lead to perfect safety.

    The strangeness of the bedfellows bound together by the anti-body-scan, anti-junk-touching cause can hardly be overstated. On Capitol Hill, staunch Democratic liberals such as congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee are on the same side as conservative Republican representative John Mica, incoming chair of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Center-lefty writers such as Jim Fallows and Jeffrey
    Goldberg find themselves in agreement with the likes of Charles Krauthammer and Mark Steyn. Bloggers at Firedoglake.com and the Huffington Post are locked in common cause with Rush Limbaugh, who recently offered an incomparable cri de coeur on the topic: “Keep your hands off my tea bag, Mr. President!”

    As Limbaugh’s injunction illustrates,
    much of the agitation directed toward the TSA is focused on the pat-down process. Yet many opponents find the full-body X-ray machines even more problematic, in part because vastly more people will be subjected to them than the newly intimate frisking (which is reserved for those who opt out of the scanners). Though the TSA initially said the machines would only be used for secondary screening, 385 of them are being employed for primary screening in 68 airports, with 1,000 units scheduled to be installed by the end of next year. That the full-body scanners expose their subjects to radiation has raised health concerns among some academics. But the greater objection is that, because they produce startlingly graphic images of those inside them, they are in effect indiscriminately inflicting on travelers a virtual strip search.

    But even for people willing to set aside civil-liberties concerns in the cause of airline safety, the porn-machine/pat-down rigmarole presents another problem: ineffectiveness. As
    Goldberg has written on his blog at TheAtlantic.com, while the new procedures might catch someone carrying an explosive on his person, à la the Underwear Bomber, they would do nothing to detect someone with a bomb inside his person (i.e., a cavity bomb).
    Rafi Sela—the
    foormer chief security officer for the Israel Airport Authority, who helped design the storied system at Ben Gurion International—has gone further, telling a group of Canadian M.P.’s, “I don’t know why everybody is running to buy these expensive and useless machines. I can overcome the body scanners with enough explosives to bring down a Boeing 747.”

    Even more to the point, the scan-and-grope approach represents an object lesson in the futile tendency toward fighting the last war. As Bruce Schneier put it pithily the other day on
    NYTimes.com, “We screen for guns and bombs, so the terrorists use box cutters. We confiscate box cutters and corkscrews, so they put explosives in their sneakers. We screen footwear, so they try to use liquids. We confiscate liquids, so they put PETN bombs in their underwear. We roll out full-body scanners, even though they wouldn’t have caught the Underwear Bomber, so they put a bomb in a printer cartridge. We ban printer cartridges over sixteen ounces—the level of magical thinking here is amazing—and they’re going to do something else. This is a stupid game, and we should stop playing it.”

    Does the public understand all this? Of course not. Is it willing to give up a degree—perhaps a great degree—of personal liberty if it’s assured that doing so is the only route to safety? Yes, it is. Yet there are signs that the public is losing faith in such assurances, and in particular that support for the new TSA procedures is less robust than many believe. In a CBS News poll in mid-November, 81 percent of respondents said they were in favor of the full-body scanners. Just one week later, an ABC News–Washington Post poll found that the percentage saying the same thing had slipped seventeen points, to 64 percent. A few days after that, a less precisely worded Zogby poll found that 61 percent opposed the combination of scanners and pat-downs, with 52 percent saying the new procedures would not prevent terrorist activity.

    One easy explanation for this slide is that the wave of publicity about the new TSA procedures—the headline-grabbing stories about nuns being groped or a bladder-cancer
    survivor being soaked in his own urine after an especially idiotic pat-down—has created a momentary bout of hysteria. But a better one is that the ebbing of trust in the TSA is the cumulative result of nearly a decade of steadily building tension and irritation. Of a growing belief that the rules being laid down are capricious, arbitrary, and mostly useless. Of an inchoate but real sense that the system is more about the appearance of safety than actual safety—the very definition of what Schneier is getting at with his term “security theater.”

    And, as it happens, that is true.
    According to most experts in the field, very few of the supposed security enhancements adopted after 9/11 have made airline travel appreciably safer. (The two exceptions that Schneier cites: reinforcing cockpit doors and encouraging passengers to fight back in the case of a hijacking.) Which reforms would actually make transportation safer? Screening checked bags and cargo rigorously, along with the backgrounds of airport employees. Behavioral—not racial or ethnic or religious—profiling. Investing vastly more in intelligence-gathering and investigation, in breaking up terror cells abroad. Doing everything possible, in other words, to stop terror plots and plotters before they reach the airport (or any other target).

    The problem with all of these strategies, however, is political.
    For any elected official, and especially a president, there is a huge incentive to constantly be demonstrating in visible ways that the government is doing everything in its power to combat terrorism. And there is an equally massive disincentive ever to roll back any new form of security, no matter how pointless or cost-ineffective it proves to be—for the moment an act of terror occurs, the one certainty is that the blame game will begin, with a vengeance. In truth, the formulation of security policy is a matter of balancing risks. But given the political environment, no public figure dare speak of it that way. Politicians can’t come out and say that any risk is acceptable,” writes Fallows. “Nor can they take the risk themselves of saying that security-theater rituals should be dropped, because of the risk of being blamed when the next attack occurs. Thus security theater is a ratchet. You can add it, but you can’t take it away.”

    In the coming weeks, we will see whether this is true when it comes to the scan-and-frisk regime. In truth, the TSA in the past has quietly rolled back various rules: the prohibition on carrying lighters aboard aircraft was scrapped in 2007, and today the limits on liquids are only enforced sporadically. But never before has the agency or White House behind it faced the kind of public pressure that is in play right now. As Obama and his people consider their alternatives, the political logic of security theater will no doubt weigh heavily on their minds. But they should realize that the audience is getting restless, and that what’s happened in the past few weeks may signal a readiness for a different, and more honest, kind of performance from the stage.


  5. #25
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Ambassador singled out for TSA pat-down

    By Elizabeth Crisp - 12/10/2010

    JACKSON, Miss. — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton expressed concern Thursday over the pat-down of India's sari-clad ambassador to the U.S. at the airport here over the weekend, an incident that has prompted calls for an apology from Washington.

    Clinton told reporters in Washington that the State Department was looking into the incident, but she didn't apologize. Ambassador Meera Shankar, 60, was selected for a pat-down Saturday by a Transportation Security Administration screener at Jackson-Evers International Airport.

    Indian Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna called the pat-down "unacceptable" and said his nation would complain to the U.S. government. This is the second time the ambassador had been singled out for a pat-down in the past three months, he said.

    "We are going to take it up with the government of United States, and I hope that things could be resolved so that such unpleasant incidents do not recur," Krishna said.

    Virander Paul, spokesman for the India's Washington Embassy, said the State Department had "reached out to the ambassador and has regretted what happened."

    Witnesses told The Clarion-Ledger in Jackson that Shankar was singled out of a group flying out of the airport for a thorough pat-down, despite having shown her diplomatic papers. She was told she was chosen was because she was wearing a sari, a traditional Indian robe. The witnesses included an entourage from Mississippi State University, which hosted the visit.

    Witnesses said Shankar asked for a private screening, but her search was conducted in a clear box.

    "The way they pat them down — it was so humiliating," said Tan Tsai, a research associate at MSU who was with Shankar. "Anybody who passed by could see it."

    The TSA maintained that it followed guidelines in the search of Shankar.


    It seems they are purposely selecting women with loose clothing (sari, Jilbab, abaya, burqa, etc). She could have just refused! Diplomats have immunity even if they commit a crime; so what was TSA going to do to her for refusing? nothing!

  6. #26
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    One Hundred Naked Citizens: One Hundred Leaked Body Scans


    One Hundred Naked Citizens: One Hundred Leaked Body Scans At the heart of the controversy over "body scanners" is a promise: The images of our naked bodies will never be public. U.S. Marshals in a Florida Federal courthouse saved 35,000 images on their scanner. These are those images.

    A Gizmodo investigation has revealed 100 of the photographs saved by the Gen 2 millimeter wave scanner from Brijot Imaging Systems, Inc., obtained by a FOIA request after it was recently revealed that U.S. Marshals operating the machine in the Orlando, Florida courthouse had improperly-perhaps illegally-saved images of the scans of public servants and private citizens.

    We understand that it will be controversial to release these photographs. But identifying features have been eliminated. And fortunately for those who walked through the scanner in Florida last year, this mismanaged machine used the less embarrassing imaging technique.

    Yet the leaking of these photographs demonstrates the security limitations of not just this particular machine, but millimeter wave and x-ray backscatter body scanners operated by federal employees in our courthouses and by TSA officers in airports across the country. That we can see these images today almost guarantees that others will be seeing similar images in the future. If you're lucky, it might even be a picture of you or your family.

    While the fidelity of the scans from this machine are of surprisingly low resolution, especially compared to the higher resolution "naked scanners" using the potentially harmful x-ray backscatter technology, the TSA and other government agencies have repeatedly touted the quality of "Advanced Imaging Technology" while simultaneously assuring customers that operators "cannot store, print, transmit or save the image, and the image." According to the TSA—and of course other agencies—images from the scanners are "automatically deleted from the system after it is cleared by the remotely located security officer." Whatever the stated policy, it's clear that it is trivial for operators to save images and remove them for distribution if they choose not to follow guidelines or that other employees could remove images that are inappropriately if accidentally stored.

    To the point, these sample images were removed from the machine in Orlando by the U.S. Marshals for distribution under the FOIA request before the machine was sent back to its manufacturer—images intact.

    We look forward to seeing your next vacation photos.

  7. #27
    Administrator Array
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    21° 30' N, 39° 10' E


    How many terrorists have the TSA captured with their new "enhanced" pat down techniques? Strike that. How many terrorists have the TSA captured since they were formed in 2001?

    Here's a hint. It looks like a goose egg.

  8. #28
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    It's all a fasad to get to their NWO...

  9. #29
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    List of U.S. airports using full-body scanners

    The Transportation Security Administration says there currently are 385 full-body scanners now in use at 68 airports U.S. airports.

    These are the airports that currently are incude the scanners among their security checkpoint options:

    • Albuquerque International Sunport Airport
    Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport
    Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport
    Boston Logan International Airport
    • Boise Airport
    • Brownsville, Texas
    • Buffalo Niagara International Airport
    Charlotte Douglas International Airport
    Chicago O'Hare International Airport
    Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport
    Cleveland International Airport
    • Columbus, Ohio: Port Columbus International Airport
    • Corpus Christie Airport
    Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport
    Denver International Airport
    Detroit Metro Airport
    • El Paso International Airport
    Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport
    • Fort Wayne International Airport
    • Fresno Airport
    • Gulfport International Airport
    • Grand Rapids Airport
    • Harrisburg International Airport
    • Harlingen/Valley International Airport
    • Hartford: Bradley International Airport
    Honolulu International Airport
    Houston Bush Houston Interncontinental Airport
    Indianapolis International Airport
    • Jacksonville International Airport
    Kansas City International
    • Laredo International Airport
    Las Vegas McCarran International Airport
    • Lihue Airport
    Los Angeles International Airport
    • McAllen Miller Airport
    Memphis International Airport
    Miami International Airport
    Milwaukee General Mitchell Milwaukee International Airport
    Minneapolis/St.Paul International Airport
    Nashville International Airport
    New Orleans Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport
    New York John F. Kennedy International Airport
    New York LaGuardia International Airport
    Newark Liberty International Airport
    Oakland International Airport
    • Omaha Eppley Field Airport
    Orlando International Airport
    • Palm Beach International Airport
    Philadelphia International Airport
    Phoenix International Airport
    Pittsburgh International Airport
    • Providence: T.F. Green Airport
    Raleigh-Durham International Airport
    • Richmond International Airport
    • Rochester International Airport
    St. Louis Lambert International Airport
    Salt Lake City International Airport
    San Antonio International Airport
    San Diego International Airport
    San Francisco International Airport
    San Jose Mineta International Airport
    San Juan Luis Munoz Marin International Airport
    Seattle-Tacoma International Airport
    • Spokane International Airport
    Tampa International Airport
    • Tulsa International Airport
    Washington Dulles International Airport
    Washington Reagan National Airport

    Airports receiving imaging technology soon:
    Chicago Midway International Airport
    Houston William P. Hobby Airport
    • Saipan International Airport

    Source: Transportation Security Administration


    Knowing which airports have them means you can fly from the ones that don't have them. Although, It might take some effort to get to such airports.
    Attached Files

  10. #30
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    TSA takes full control of passenger watch list checks

    By Aaron Karp | December 2, 2010

    US Dept. of Homeland Security stated that all passengers on flights "within or bound for the United States are now being checked against government watch lists" under implementation of the Transportation Security Administration's "Secure Flight" program, which entails the agency prescreening a passenger's full name, birth date and gender prior to issuance of a boarding pass.

    Previously, airlines were tasked with checking names against watch lists; now, in accordance with a final rule issued by DHS in 2008 (ATW Daily News, Oct. 23, 2008), airlines are required to collect a passenger's information at the time of reservation and provide it to TSA. DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano said in a statement, "Secure Flight makes air travel safer for everyone by screening every passenger against the latest intelligence before a boarding pass is issued."

    TSA Administrator John Pistole added, "The threats we face in the aviation sector are real and evolving, and we must confront them with strong and dynamic security measures. Secure Flight bolsters our efforts to be more intelligence-driven and risk-based in our approach to aviation security."

    Some 197 airlines are participating in the program, for which full implementation was required by Jan. 1. "We are pleased that [airlines and government] were able to reach this important security milestone ahead of schedule," US Air Transport Assn. President and CEO James May said. TSA, which noted it "adheres to strict protocols to protect individual privacy" related to the passenger information provided by airlines, pointed out it has been handling the watch list checks for all domestic flights since June 22.

    DHS said that "99% of passengers" will be able to receive boarding passes at home, via kiosks or airport counters just as before Secure Flight was in place. "Individuals found to match watch list parameters will be subject to secondary screening, a law enforcement interview or prohibition from boarding an aircraft, depending on the specific case," it stated.

    Pistole commented that a positive offshoot of the program will be making it less likely passengers will be wrongly confused with names on watch lists. "This will reduce, perhaps substantially, the number of people seeking redress," he told reporters.



    All airline passengers are now checked against watch lists, Homeland Security says

    By Hugo Martín - December 6, 2010

    For all the protest and controversy that arose during Thanksgiving weekend over enhanced pat-down searches and full-body image scans at airports, the Homeland Security Department is celebrating the addition of a security measure that did not draw public outcry.

    The department announced last week that 100% of passengers flying within or bound for the U.S. are now checked against government watch lists that are updated regularly based on the latest intelligence. The measure was recommended in 2004 by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, also known as the 9/11 commission.

    Under the Secure Flight initiative, all airlines flying in the U.S. must collect the full name, date of birth and gender of every passenger so the government can check them against watch lists before the passengers can board a plane.

    Domestic carriers were required to comply by Nov. 1, and they all did so by June, according to the Transportation Security Administration. And international airlines, whose deadline is Dec. 31, all complied by Nov. 30, the agency said.

    Despite some airline industry experts' fears that the requirement would lead to delays and headaches at the nation's airports, the TSA said it has so far improved airline security, including on Thanksgiving weekend, without creating any problems.

    "The entire process throughout the holiday weekend was smooth, with minimal waits across the country," TSA spokesman Nico Melendez said.

    He said Secure Flight is "a key component" of the TSA's efforts to keep airline passengers safer, along with enhanced pat-down searches and increased use of full-body image scanners.


  11. #31
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Welcome Home, boys, TSA "Interrogates" our Soldiers

    Hello. Is there ANYONE at TSA with a brain????

    As the Chalk Leader for my flight home from Afghanistan , I witnessed the following:

    When we were on our way back from Afghanistan , we flew out of Baghram Air Field. We went through customs at BAF, full body scanners (no groping), had all of our bags searched, the whole nine yards. Our first stop was Shannon , Ireland to refuel. After that, we had to stop at Indianapolis , Indiana to drop off about 100 folks from the Indiana National Guard. That's where the stupid started.

    First, everyone was forced to get off the plane-even though the plane wasn't refueling again. All 330 people got off that plane, rather than let the 100 people from the ING get off. We were filed from the plane to a holding area. No vending machines, no means of escape. Only a male/female latrine.

    It's probably important to mention that we were ALL carrying weapons. Everyone was carrying an M4 Carbine (rifle) and some, like me, were also carrying an M9 pistol. Oh, and our gunners had M-240B machine guns. Of course, the weapons weren't loaded. And we had been cleared of all ammo well before we even got to customs at Baghram, then AGAIN at customs.

    The TSA personnel at the airport seriously considered making us unload all of the baggage from the SECURE cargo hold to have it reinspected. Keep in mind, this cargo had been unpacked, inspected piece by piece by U.S. Customs officials, resealed and had bomb-sniffing dogs give it a one-hour run through. After two hours of sitting in this holding area, the TSA decided not to reinspect our Cargo-just to inspect us again: Soldiers on the way home from war, who had already been inspected, reinspected and kept in a SECURE holding area for 2 hours. Ok, whatever. So we lined up to go through security AGAIN.

    This is probably another good time to remind you all that all of us were carrying actual assault rifles, and some of us were also carrying pistols.

    So we're in line, going through one at a time. One of our Soldiers had his Gerber multi-tool. TSA confiscated it. Kind of ridiculous, but it gets better. A few minutes later, a guy empties his pockets and has a pair of nail clippers. Nail clippers. TSA informs the Soldier that they're going to confiscate his nail clippers. The conversation went something like this:

    TSA Guy: You can't take those on the plane.

    Soldier: What? I've had them since we left country.

    TSA Guy: You're not suppose to have them.

    Soldier: Why?

    TSA Guy: They can be used as a weapon.

    Soldier: [touches butt stock of the rifle] But this actually is a weapon. And I'm allowed to take it on.

    TSA Guy: Yeah but you can't use it to take over the plane. You don't have bullets.

    Soldier: And I can take over the plane with nail clippers?

    TSA Guy: [awkward silence]

    Me: Dude, just give him your **** nail clippers so we can get the f*** out of here. I'll buy you a new set.

    Soldier: [hands nail clippers to TSA guy, makes it through security]

    To top it off, the TSA demanded we all be swabbed for "explosive residue" detection. Everyone failed, [go figure, we just came home from a war zone], because we tested positive for "Gun Powder Residue". Who the hell is hiring these people?

    This might be a good time to remind everyone that approximately 233 people re-boarded that plane with assault rifles, pistols, and machine guns-but nothing that could have been used as a weapon.

    Can someone please tell me What the hell happened to OUR country while we were gone?

    Sgt. Mad Dog Tracy

    Well sir, while you were away fighting for freedom we seemed to have lost it at home. Never too late to discover what the real enemy is and take back our constitution.

  12. #32
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    10,000 Child Porn Images Found On Ex-TSA Worker’s Computer

    Epidemic of TSA screeners connected with rape, pedophilia and sexual perversion explodes
    Paul Joseph Watson - December 17, 2010

    Yet another TSA worker has been exposed as a pedophile to add the the epidemic of cases that prove those who are inclined to work in jobs that allow them to sexually molest children via invasive groping measures at airports are the most unprofessional, perverted and criminally-minded individuals imaginable.

    “A former TSA employee was arraigned on child pornography charges, Middlesex District Attorney Gerry Leone said Thursday,” reports WCVB-TV Boston.

    “On Oct. 15, a search warrant was executed at Cheever’s home, where the suspected computer was registered, Leone said. As a result of the search warrant, multiple computers, hard drives and multiple pieces of external digital media were confiscated from the home, Leone said. An onsite preview of the computer and two external hard drives confirmed that Cheever was storing more than 10,000 child porn videos and images, Leone said.”

    Cheever’s penchant for looking at naked pictures of children was undoubtedly a perk of the job when he applied to become a TSA screener, given the fact thatbody scanner images show intricate details of a person’s genitalia.

    This is another alarming reminder of the fact that a statistically inflated number of people who are attracted to become TSA workers are criminally perverted.

    As we previously highlighted, there is an epidemic of cases where TSA workers have been identified as rapists, sexual predators and pedophiles.

    In November, “A TSA employee based at Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport tried to kill himself after allegedly abducting a woman, sexually assaulting her then giving her a suicide note to deliver,” reported the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
    49-year-old Randall Scott King kidnapped the woman after she had accompanied him from the airport.

    The story coincided with another incident highlighting once again how TSA workers transfer their predatory sexual behavior from their private lives to their jobs. A young woman with ample breasts was targeted by TSA workers for extra screening after they ogled her body.

    “It was pretty obvious. One of the guys that was staring me up and down was the one who pulled me over,” said Eliana Sutherland. “Not a comfortable feeling.”

    Working in airport security seems to attract perverts, rapists and pedophiles because it gives them legitimate cover through which to exercise their deviancy. Indeed, a prank caller who pretended to be a sex pervert phoned the TSA about applying for a job and was treated seriously by a TSA staffer.

    Back in March it emerged that TSA worker Sean Shanahan, who was employed at Boston Logan International Airport to pat down passengers, had been charged with multiple child sex crimes targeting an underage girl.

    Similarly, 57-year-old Charles Henry Bennett, who worked at Orlando International Airport as a TSA screener, was arrested earlier this month in connection with the molestation of a 6-year-old girl whom he planned to make his “sex slave”.

    Stories about TSA officials and other airport security workers abusing the use of naked body scanners have become commonplace.

    44-year-old Rolando Negrin beat his supervisorwith a police baton after he had cracked jokes about Negrin’s small manhood when he walked through a naked scanner as part of a training exercise at Miami International Airport. The story underscored the fact that authorities had been lying all along about the claim that the scanners did not show sensitive details of genitalia.

    Indian film star Shahrukh Khan told a BBC talk show that naked images of his body from the scanner were printed out and circulated by airport staff at Heathrow in London. Heathrow denied the claim but Khan himself never retracted the story, and had no apparent motive for making it up.

    Heathrow authorities were unable to deny a later example of the scanners being abused, when it emerged that a Heathrow worker had perved over a naked image of a female colleague after she passed through one of the devices, before commenting, “I love those gigantic tits”.

    Jo Margetson, 29, reported John Laker, 25, to the police after she had entered the x-ray machine by mistake and Laker took the image before making lewd comments.

    Airport security staff workers are among the least trustworthy people to operate these machines. Such individuals are routinely caught abusing their authority for their own ego trip or sexual perversion.

    TSA workers have also been caught in other abuses of power, including stealing laptop computers, sabotaging sensitive screening databases, and joking about planting drugs on travelers.

    The naked scanners are being manned by people like a TSA agent who flipped out and began screaming, “I am god, I’m in charge,” shortly after he got off duty at LAX earlier this year.

    The TSA is a complete joke – while perverts and pedophiles are busy groping your children and ogling over their naked body scanner image,people with loaded guns are breezing through security while others are hiding in the wheels of Boeing 737′s.

    The fact that the TSA temporarily mothballed their body scanners and invasive groping techniques in a political points scoring ploy designed to deflate the success of the national opt out day protest also underscores that their procedures are nothing more than security theatre, run by an army of ignorant morons following orders who are accompanied by a gaggle of hardcore sex perverts, pedophiles, and criminal predators.

    States and local authorities across the country need to follow the example of New Jersey and introduce legislation immediately to kick the TSA out of airports and replace them with private security who are professionally trained and who are actually interested in stopping terrorists rather than exercising their sexual deviancy through groping children and ogling naked body scanner images.

  13. #33
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Woman arrested at ABIA after refusing enhanced pat down

    by JIM BERGAMO - December 22, 2010


    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.


    Austin airport doesn't has a scanner but if someone sets of a metal detector then they get the enhanced pat down.

  14. #34
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    New Jersey looks to ban TSA searches

    State senator plans to introduce bill prohibiting the searches

    BY MARK IMPOMENI - 12-13-2010

    New Jersey could soon become the epicenter of the growing controversy over the new Transportation Security Administration (TSA) passenger screening procedures being implemented at airports nationwide.

    Conservative state Senator and tea party favorite Mike Doherty (R) announced that he plans to introduce a bill in the legislature to ban the searches in the Garden State. While the bill is being drafted, Doherty has introduced a resolution and an online petition calling on Congress to immediately review both the screening procedures and mounting passenger complaints of abuse at the hands of TSA officers.

    The petition has garnered over 1,400 signatures since it was launched last week. In a statement announcing the bill, Doherty characterized the searches as unconstitutional, and said that the Obama Administration's "attitude and actions" in implementing the searches left him no choice but to move a bill to ban the procedures. "[O]ur society is founded upon our ability to exercise our individual civil liberties freely, and I stand ready and willing to defend those liberties when they are threatened," Doherty stated. "It is with great sadness that I have come to recognize that one of our greatest threats has been presented by officials of the TSA who have begun to implement intrusive searches of law abiding Americans who are traveling within our borders." "I am drafting new legislation that will make it perfectly clear that in New Jersey, our Constitutionally granted civil liberties are treasured and will be protected. I am calling upon my colleagues in the Legislature to step up and co-sponsor legislation that will protect the rights of citizens in New Jersey," Doherty said.

    The bill will be introduced in early December; and will explicitly prohibit security personnel at New Jersey airports from using imaging machines that produce images of a passenger' naked body and enhanced pat-down techniques in which a passenger's intimate body parts are touched. Doherty said the bill will provide no immunity from New Jersey's privacy and child pornography statutes.

    "If an individual is touched in a private area during a search, when there is no arrest or probable cause that is affirmed by oath or affirmation, the person who violated that individual's privacy will be guilty of the crime of 'sexual assault,' and will not be immune from prosecution in the state of New Jersey," Doherty stated. "If an image is generated that provides detail of an individual's private parts that violates New Jersey's privacy or child pornography statutes, the person who generated that image will not be immune from prosecution in the state of New Jersey. Finally, if imaging devices use technologies that are believed by the Legislature to be dangerous to individuals due to their broad or random use in security applications such as airports, the State of New Jersey will prohibit such use and will provide no immunity to individuals who violate any state law," the statement concluded.

    Doherty's effort appears to have the support of two unlikely allies: The American Civil Liberties Union, and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (R). State ACLU Executive Director Deborah Jacobs appeared at a press conference with opponents of the searches to announce the resolution. Jacobs has said that the backscatter imaging devices being used by the TSA, "involves a direct invasion of privacy." The machines, "[produce] strikingly graphic images of passengers' bodies, essentially taking a naked picture of air passengers as they pass through security checkpoints," she said. At a town hall appearance on Monday, Christie fielded a question about the procedures, calling them, "too invasive." "None of us wants to be on an airplane with somebody who wants to blow it up. We have to find a balance here, but I think the TSA at this point has erred on the wrong side of that balance." Christie said. "I support the TSA trying to keep us safe, but not the way they're doing it."

    Christie's comments came as Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was appearing in Trenton with US Senator Frank Lautenberg. Napolitano gave little ground on the TSA controversy, saying that the public would have to grow accustomed to the screening procedures. "It is something new. Most Americans are not used to a real law enforcement pat-down like that," Napolitano said. "As we move forward, of course we will listen to concerns. Of course we will make adjustments when called upon, but not changes or adjustments that will affect the operational capability we need to have to make sure travel is safe." That is unlikely to satisfy Doherty, who says the issues raised by the TSA searches are greater than a matter of mere inconvenience. "We believe that there are Constitutional violations taking place. When you go to the airport - contrary to what TSA supervisors are saying - when you buy an airline ticket you do not give up your Constitutional rights."



  15. #35
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    TSA Screening Outrage Solution: Biometrics Please

    by Ed - 11/24/2010

    Now I understand the revolt against TSA body scans and pat downs. Now I know why all of a sudden these security screenings became an orchestrated problem for so many. They're going to offer you a kinder, gentler way of moving you through the checkpoints.

    They want your biometrics.

    Once entered in to the national database, you can go anywhere hassle free. Not 'free' as in 'freedom', but without hassle. They will also introduce this form of surveillance to other venues. But remember, it's all for your safety and security. They will know everywhere you travel. Let me rephrase that.. they will know where you are, anywhere, the moment you arrive.

    You have to realize the way free Americans are persuaded in to accepting new laws is often through the use of predictive programming. Another way of looking at it, a way that has been used for decades. 'Problem Reaction Solution'.

    Problem: How to get free Americans to freely give their personally identifying information.

    Reaction: Cause outrage of free Americans for the way the are treated like common criminals / terrorist.

    Solution: Offer free Americans a way out of showing their bodies and having strangers grope sensitive areas.

    They have been pushing the biometric agenda for years. In fact, I mentioned this in this post from 2008: Bush signs Biometrics for National Security Directive. Here's a snip:

    National Security Presidential Directive and Homeland Security Presidential Directive


    SUBJECT: Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security


    This directive establishes a framework to ensure that Federal executive departments and agencies (agencies) use mutually compatible methods and procedures in the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information of individuals in a lawful and appropriate manner, while respecting their information privacy and other legal rights under United States law.

    These directives were implemented under the guise of screening terrorist. That sounds familiar doesn't it ? Furthermore, under the guise of screening for terrorist:

    (1) The executive branch has developed an integrated screening capability to protect the Nation against "known and suspected terrorists" (KSTs). The executive branch shall build upon this success, in accordance with this directive, by enhancing its capability to collect, store, use, analyze, and share biometrics to identify and screen KSTs and other persons who may pose a threat to national security.

    (2) Existing law determines under what circumstances an individual's biometric and biographic information can be collected. This directive requires agencies to use, in a more coordinated and efficient manner, all biometric information associated with persons who may pose a threat to national security, consistent with applicable law, including those laws relating to privacy and confidentiality of personal data.

    (3) This directive provides a Federal framework for applying existing and emerging biometric technologies to the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of data in identification and screening processes employed by agencies to enhance national security, consistent with applicable law, including information privacy and other legal rights under United States law.

    (4) The executive branch recognizes the need for a layered approach to identification and screening of individuals, as no single mechanism is sufficient. For example, while existing name-based screening procedures are beneficial, application of biometric technologies, where appropriate, improve the executive branch's ability to identify and screen for persons who may pose a national security threat. To be most effective, national security identification and screening systems will require timely access to the most accurate and most complete biometric, biographic, and related data that are, or can be, made available throughout the executive branch.

    (5) This directive does not impose requirements on State, local, or tribal authorities or on the private sector. It does not provide new authority to agencies for collection, retention, or dissemination of information or for identification and screening activities.

    Remember that airports are not considered under the 'Patriot Act', State, local, tribal or private sector. They are 'Federally mandated areas'. Besides, they're not going to impose the use of biometrics on you or the areas mentioned. You are going to welcome them freely, as long as you will no longer be subjected to naked body scans or obtrusive pat down searches. You will be sacrificing more of your freedom because of an inconvenience to most, and a possible health risk to some.

    Malo Periculosam Libertatem Quam Quietum Servitium = Prefer freedom with danger than slavery with security

    On a side note: You do know that Microsoft's Kinect maps your whole body ? Where does this information go ? Sure in your profile, but where is it physically stored ? And to think big brother continues building his database and many of you don't even know it. After all, it's just a game console. Who would have thought.

    Here is what the Kinect all seeing eye sees:

    Kinect with nightshot

    This is the infrared projection kinect uses to see you and your environment. You can try it with any camera using nightshot mode.

    I direct your attention Here for more on biometrics, iris scans and facial recognition, and Big Brother and Surveillance.


  16. #36
    Administrator Array
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    21° 30' N, 39° 10' E


    It's amazing what a $150 Kinect camera is capable of. Our Kinect isn't connected to the Internet.

  17. #37
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    Insane: Six-Year-Old Girl Gets Invasive Groping By TSA [With Video]

    Julianne Escobedo Shepherd April 11, 2011

    Though TSA has cooled its jets a bit when it comes to the naked-scanner, but it's still going buckwild when it comes to patdowns (read AlterNet's piece on traveler'sworst TSA horror stories here). This weekend, a video hit the internet that shows a TSA agent giving a completely invasive patdown to a tiny 6-year-old girl, once again prompting the question: are these people going too far? The patdown is uncomfortable to watch, as the TSA agent seems to go above and beyond the basic frisking you'd expect anyone to deem appropriate for a small child. It's not like she looks like she's carting a knife in her boot, or anything. Here's the video, via Raw Replay:


    Ky. parents: TSA frisked our 6-year-old daughter

    A Kentucky couple wants the TSA to change how it screens children after their 6-year-old daughter was frisked at the New Orleans airport. The couple posted a video of the search on YouTube. (April 13)



  18. #38
    Administrator Array
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    21° 30' N, 39° 10' E


    TSA backscatter radiation safety tests were rigged

    Tuesday, May 17, 2011
    by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
    Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles...)

    Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/032425_ai...#ixzz1MiAJNl00

    (NaturalNews) It can now be revealed by NaturalNews that the TSA faked its safety data on its X-ray airport scanners in order to deceive the public about the safety of such devices.

    As evidenced by recent events in Washington, we now live in an age where the federal government simply fakes whatever documents, news or evidence it wants people to believe, then releases that information as if it were fact. This is the modus operandi of the Department of Homeland Security, which must fabricate false terror alerts to keep itself in business -- and now the TSA division has taken the fabrication of false evidence to a whole new level with its naked body scanners (see below).

    Even physics professors question the TSA's obvious cover-up

    The evidence of the TSA's fakery is now obvious thanks to the revelations of a letter signed by five professors from the University of California, San Francisco and Arizona State University. You can view the full text of the letter at: http://www.propublica.org/documents...

    The letter reveals:

    • To this day, there has been no credible scientific testing of the TSA's naked body scanners. The claimed "safety" of the technology by the TSA is based on rigged tests.

    • The testing that did take place was done on a custom combination of spare parts rigged by the manufacturer of the machines (Rapidscan) and didn't even use the actual machines installed in airports. In other words, the testing was rigged.

    • The names of the researchers who conducted the radiation tests at Rapidscan have been kept secret! This means the researchers are not available for scientific questioning of any kind, and there has been no opportunity to even ask whether they are qualified to conduct such tests. (Are they even scientists?)

    TSA operates in complete secrecy

    None of the Rapidscan tests have been available to be subjected to peer review. They are quite literally secret tests using secret techniques engineered by secret researchers. We the People apparently have no right to see the data, nor the methodology, nor even the names of the researchers who supposedly carried out these safety tests.

    • The final testing report produced from this fabricated testing scenario has been so heavily redacted that "there is no way to repeat any of these measurements," say the professors. In other words, the testing violates the very first tenant of scientific experimentation which is that all experiments must be repeatable in order to be verified as accurate.

    As the professors state in their letter:

    The document is heavily redacted with red stamps over the words and figures. In every case the electric current used which correlates one to one with X-ray dose has been specifically redacted. Thus there is no way to repeat any of these measurements. While the report purports to present the results of objective testing, in fact the JHU APL personnel, who are unnamed anywhere in the document either as experimenters or as authors, were not provided with a machine by Rapiscan. Instead they were invited to the manufacturing site to observe a mock-up of components (spare parts) that were said to be similar to those that are parts of the Rapiscan system. The tests were performed by the manufacturer using the manufacturer's questionable test procedures.

    You got that? Where is the outrage from the "scientific" community on all this? This quack science TSA testing is so atrociously and inexcusably bad that if this fabricated evidence were presented at any sort of scientific meeting, they would be laughed off the stage and publicly vilified in the media. And yet, somehow, when the TSA engaged in this sort of quack science, virtually the entire scientific community says nothing. Only a small group of especially courageous scientists has stood up to this obvious quackery, and even these professors are of course being blasted in the press and called un-American for merely questioning the obviously flimsy evidence being laughably fronted by the TSA.

    I mean, seriously: Can you imagine the total outcry if an herbal product company claimed that its products cured cancer, and it did all the testing itself, and all the names of the researchers were kept secret, and the methodology was a secret, and the whole document was 50% redacted to protect "proprietary information?" They would actually be arrested by the federal government for running a criminal scam! So why can the TSA get away with the exact same scandalous junk science distortions and virtually no one in the mainstream media asks a single question?

    The complete fabrication of safety in the name of false science

    It's amazing what America has come to these days, folks. The federal government isn't merely counterfeiting money every day (or stealing from your retirement accounts to keep itself afloat, which just started happening yesterday), but the feds are also fabricating scientific evidence to keep pushing their utterly fabricated "war on terror." The feds in Washington aren't really fighting a war on terror... they ARE the terror! When the feds reach down your pants and feel your junk; when they force you to be fried with high-powered X-rays at the airport; and when they threaten anyone who stands up to their Nazi-like marching orders, they have become the very terrorist organization they claim to be fighting.

    • The dose rates of X-rays being emitted by the Rapidscan machines are actually quite high -- comparable to that of CT scans, say the professors. Yes, the dose duration is significantly lower than a CT scan, but the dose intensity is much higher than what you might think. And as anyone who knows a bit about physics and biology will tell you, the real danger from radiation is a high-intensity, short-duration exposure. That's exactly what the TSA's backscatter machines produce.

    • The radiation detection device used by Rapidscan to measure the output of the machines -- an ion chamber -- is incapable of accurately measuring the high-intensity burst of radiation produced by the TSA's naked body scanners, say the professors.

    • At the same time, the radiation field measurement device used by the TSA -- a Fluke 451 instrument -- is incapable of measuring the high dose rates emitted by backscatter machines. The measurement devices, in effect, "max out" and cannot measure the full intensity of the exposure. Thus, the TSA's claims of "low radiation" are actually fraudulent. By the way, the device mentioned by the TSA really is an F 451. Does that ring a bell in terms of fiction novels? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahren...)

    • The amount of electrical current applied to the X-ray tubes has been redacted by the TSA (working with John Hopkins). This makes it impossible for third-party scientists to accurately calculate the actual radiation exposure, and it hints at yet more evidence of a total TSA cover-up. As explained by the professors:

    ...the X-ray dose is proportional to the current through the X-ray tube. Not having access to the current used in the JHU test, or in the field application of the scanner means that the measurements at JHU are irrelevant to the dose at the airport. There is also no data on the pixel size and overscanning ratio, which also bear directly on the dose delivered to subjects. The statement in the HHS letter that the fluence is not a relevant quantity ignores fundamental physics.

    There shall be no independent testing whatsoever

    The TSA adamantly refuses to allow independent testing of the radiation levels being emitted by the machines. The agency is using the cover story that "terrorists might be able to circumvent the technology" if anyone is allowed to actually test the machine.

    Hilarious! This is the very definition of quack science. You have to trust our in-house fabricated experiments, and we won't tell you how we even arrived at our test results, and we won't release the names of the scientists who even ran the tests, but we can't tell you more because of the terrorists.

    Notably, this is after Osama Bin Laden has already been killed, and he was the whole reason the TSA started up in the first place. The terror mastermind is dead, in other words, and still the TSA can't trust university physics professors to conduct credible science on its naked body scanners.

    Actual radiation emitted by the machines is far higher than what the TSA claims

    John Sedat, a professor emeritus in biochemistry and biophysics at UCSF and the primary author of the letter says, "..the best guess of the dose is much, much higher than certainly what the public thinks." This indicates the public has been deeply misled by the actual amount of radiation emitted by the machines.

    • Peter Rez, the physics professor from Arizona State, says that the high-quality images described by the TSA could not be produced with the low levels of radiation being claimed by the TSA. The images, in other words, don't match up with the TSA's cover story. Rez estimates the actual radiation exposure is 45 times higher than what we've previously been told.

    • The TSA machines are capable of firing even higher levels of radiation into a "region of interest" (such as your anus or scrotum, in which the TSA seems to be taking great interest these days), thereby exposing that region to even higher levels of radiation than the rest of your body.

    Mechanical failure and software bugs

    The backscatter scanning devices uses a high-powered X-ray beam that is quickly moved back and forth across your body by reflecting the beam off a moving wheel. If that wheel fails for any reason and stops moving, the traveler could be pierced with a deadly X-ray beam that focuses extremely high levels of radiation on a small group of cells, mutating their DNA.

    This means the backscatter devices are mechanical systems, and all mechanical systems eventually fail (just like airplanes). The TSA has done absolutely nothing to address the reliability of these mechanical wheels nor to allow independent testing of the reliability of these wheels.

    • The TSA refuses to allow independent scientists to review its software code that controls the radiation beam. Thus, the software and its capabilities also remain a complete secret. What if there's a software bug that causes 10,000 times the usual radiation exposure for some unlucky traveler? Suppose the pervert TSA agent zooms in on some 9-year-old child's junk to capture a picture for his own private collection... does that result in yet more radiation? (Fact: One TSA agent has already been arrested for distributing child pornography.) (http://www.tsagoons.com/2011/04/23/...)

    See more at www.TSAgoons.com (warning: graphic language and imagery on that site.)

    What science? We don't need no stinkin' science!

    As we're all now learning, the TSA completely bypassed the normal procedure for independent testing of equipment to be used on the public. As explained by the professors:

    The independent testing of the safety of these specific scanners has not been rigorous nor has it been held to the standards usually associated with new devices before approval for utilization in the public sector. Usually the exact technology, as installed, is sent to a university, national laboratory or other outside facility that has the expertise to test, for an extended period of time to enable an in-depth study -- usually by several independent groups.

    The U.S. government, however, no longer feels it needs to engage in any "scientific" testing whatsoever. Why bother? The government can simply fabricate whatever results it wants and then release those to the mainstream media which will dutifully reprint the government's lies as if they were facts. The truth is no longer relevant to the government's tyrannical agenda. As long as no one questions the lies, it hardly matters how unreasonable or bizarre those lies become. Government can always play the terrorism card and force people to shut up and stop asking questions, you see. "How dare you question our integrity. We're the government! We're protecting YOU from terrorism!"

    Sure they are. By feeling up my anus? Seriously? If it wasn't actually true, it would be hilarious.

    What is the TSA hiding?

    NaturalNews asks the obvious question: Why won't the TSA subject its backscatter scanning machines to independent testing? Why won't it allow five different university physics departments to conduct five independent tests -- using documented equipment and methodologies -- and thereby assure the public, with credibility, that its machines are perfectly safe?

    I can tell you why: Because the TSA is lying. The agency has fabricated its test results. It has conspired to deceive and mislead the American public over the safety of these machines, and it has done so through an agenda of government secrecy and scientific fraud. The TSA, lacking any credibility whatsoever, has resorted to routine lying about its machines, its procedures and its intentions. When 6-month-old babies have their rear-ends searched by TSA agents wearing evil grins (http://scottystarnes.files.wordpres...), you know it's all gone too far.

    The TSA refuses to allow independent testing of its machines because it knows what NaturalNews readers already know: That if the machines were honestly and accurately tested, they would show far higher levels of radiation exposure than what we've been told. It would show that the TSA's body scanners significantly increase the risk of cancer to a population that is already over-irradiated with medical imaging tests such as CT scans and chest X-rays.

    The TSA, like virtually every other department of the federal government, is now actively engaged in the routine falsification of the scientific data concerning a device that is exposing millions of Americans to an increased risk of cancer. And as long as the federal government claims to have "supreme power" while refusing to answer to the People, we're only going to get more of this tyranny in the months ahead.

    The TSA has become the terrorist organization

    This is not merely unacceptable; this is a CRIME against the American people. These TSA body scanners are, effectively, Weapons of Mass Destruction that are unleashing ionizing radiation upon an unsuspecting public.

    And they are doing it right in your face; telling you it's all perfectly safe while, behind the scenes, they had to engineer a specially-rigged unit just to run their rigged tests using measurement devices that can't even record the high levels of radiation actually being emitted.

    The public backlash against these devices is so strong and so loud that news crews have to interview dozens of people on camera just to find one person to actually say something positive about the TSA's pat-down and ionizing scanners. That's the report from Alex Jones, who has also been covering TSA tyranny in great detail. The popularity of his www.Infowars.com website is exploding in the wake of the government's increasingly bold lies and disinfo campaigns that frankly are backfiring on them. A lot of people are easily fooled, but just as many aren't. Probably 95% of all travelers are absolutely opposed to everything the TSA forces them to go through at the airport.

    That's why Texas is about to pass a law that would criminalize TSA agents who reach down your pants and molest you or your children. But the TSA has put out a preemptive statement on its blog that claims none of this matters. "States cannot regulate the federal government," the TSA claims. And it actually quotes the U.S. Constitution as the source of its power! (What about the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution? How convenient that they forgot all about that part, eh?)

    The passage of this law could lead to a fascinating showdown in Texas. What we need is a group of Texas Rangers to march into the airport in Dallas and arrest the TSA agents, handcuff them, and march them off to jail. Then let's see the feds try to invade Texas to free their criminal TSA agents. That should be amusing. I've spent some time in Texas, talking with the locals, and I can guarantee you that a bunch of tyrant feds trying to invade Texas are going to be absolutely shocked at the intensity of the public resistance they will meet.

    The growing TSA resistance movement

    By the way, with the TSA's molestation of children and outright lying about the safety of its machines, the federal government is vastly overestimating the stupidity of the general public. People are taking notes of the encroaching tyranny, and while they may pretend to voluntarily walk through the TSA's security checkpoints right now, there will come a day when the American people simply refuse to be herded like cattle anymore. I predict a widespread backlash against the TSA, reflected through state legislative efforts and public protests that will demand an end to the TSA which has now come to mean "Touch Some Ass!"

    The hilarious ending to all this, by the way, is that the backscatter machines are also dosing all the TSA workers with regular bursts of ionizing radiation, meaning that the very people working for the tyrannical TSA are, themselves, victims of its deception.

    Somehow, that seems incredibly fitting.

    Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/032425_ai...#ixzz1MiAVZfma

  19. #39
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007


    O'Hare TSA Employee Fired Over Racist, Homphobic, Anti-Muslim Facebook Posts

    16 Nov 2011

    Chicago - Roy Egan, an O’Hare Airport baggage handler who allegedly spewed racist and bigoted rants against Muslims, African Americans, Latinos and homosexuals on his Facebook page has been fired, according to the Chicago Council on American-Islamic Relations.

    CAIR said Egan had worked at the airport for nine years, was suspended in October and terminated this month.

    Egan used his Facebook page, where he openly identified himself as a TSA officer, to post comments such as: “FILTHY MUSLIM,” Muslims “need to be exterminated”, “BURN ISLAM”, “Islam, a cult that glorifies death,” and ”Does anything at all make you smile more than a Muslim burning by his own hateful hand.”

    He also posted remarks about President Barack Obama, First Lady Michelle Obama, and Attorney General Eric Holder.

    CAIR-Chicago representatives met with Transportation Security Administration leadership in Chicago three weeks ago to voice the concerns of the Muslim community about the incident and to ask that more be done to prevent future incidents from happening.

    “We made it clear that Egan’s discourse was as much an embarrassment to the agency and the values it stands for, as it was an affront against Muslims and other minorities,” Ahmed Rehab, CAIR-Chicago Executive Director, said.

    “By the end of the meeting, we felt convinced that the TSA leadership takes such violations of its code of conduct very seriously and that they genuinely set out to do their utmost to ensure that all constituents are treated with fairness and respect.”

    “The TSA works hard everyday to keep Americans safe,” Amina Sharif, TSA communications coordinator said in the release. “When such egregious behavior is flagged on the part of one of their agents, it breeds confidence in us as passengers that it is dealt with as swiftly and as seriously as it was in the case of Roy Egan.”

    Egan was in violation of the TSA code of conduct which stipulates that its employees — on or off duty — behave in a manner that avoids causing the public to raise questions about their judgment and ability to enforce the mission of the agency, the release said.

  20. #40
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007

    Default The TSA as we know it is dead - here's why

    The TSA as we know it is dead - here's why

    If you don't believe the TSA is doomed after watching yesterday's House Aviation Subcommittee hearing, then you'll have to at least agree that the agency as we know can't continue to exist as it does.

    For starters, TSA Administrator John Pistole refused to testify before the committee on the innocuous subject of "common sense" improvements to America's airport security, reportedly because the committee has no jurisdiction over his agency. (That's odd - I always thought Congress funded the federal government, but maybe I wasn't paying attention during government class.)

    One by one, panelists took turns excoriating the agency charged with protecting America's transportation systems. It was plainly clear why Pistole was a no-show, and it had nothing to do with jurisdiction; it would have been an openly hostile crowd.

    Charles Edwards, the Department of Homeland Security's acting inspector general, described the TSA as bureaucratic and dysfunctional. Stephen Lord of the Government Accountability Office, suggested the agency was ignoring the thousands of complaints from air travelers. And Kenneth Dunlap, who represented the International Air Transport Association, criticized the current TSA as expensive, inconsistent, and reactive.

    "As this mushrooming agency has spun out of control," the committee chairman, John Mica, concluded, "passengers have not been well served."

    The congressmen present in the hearing agreed with many of the criticisms, but it's the solutions that would have sent Pistole running for the exits. On the conservative end, critics recommended aggressively reforming the TSA to create a smaller, more responsive agency that fulfills its mission of protecting and serving air travelers.

    But some went much further. Charlie Leocha of the Consumer Travel Alliance, who represented the interests of air travelers on the committee, said the TSA should not just be downsized, but also limited to protecting only air travel (something it currently isn't).

    In his testimony, he described a future TSA that more closely resembled the pre-9/11 security system, which used magnetometers (metal detectors) as its primary screening method, had employees that dressed in non-threatening uniforms, and banned only the most dangerous weapons, such as guns and explosives, from aircraft.

    The real security work would take place behind the scenes, prescreening every passenger with the help of technology and through coordination between intelligence agencies, law enforcement, and airlines.

    "The mass screening of passengers would be replaced for the great majority of passengers with a Trusted Traveler program that seamlessly checks passengers before they fly, while at the same time being respectful of their privacy," says Leocha. “Every passenger is already prescreened for every flight.”

    Such an agency would be called the TSA in name only. In fact, it would be better named the Airport Security Administration, although that acronym might be problematic.

    With a powerful congressional committee like this lining up behind sweeping TSA reform, it is not a question of if, but when Congress -- which by the way, does sign the TSA's checks -- acts to dismantle this $8-billion-a-year security boondoggle.

    I'm not just saying that because I'm CTA's ombudsman and helped devise some of these solutions. Anyone who doesn't believe the current TSA is a federal disaster area with an impossibly sprawling mandate isn't in touch with reality.

    The TSA as it exists can't die soon enough.

    Note: For those of you looking for a response to some of last week's comments on the TSA opt-out story, I have included them here. I read every comment posted here and although I can't respond to every one, I do my best to address them. Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts