Open letter to Disney concerning new TSA full body scan.

[padawans]

Thanks for the welcome!



What I quoted appeared in the digital version of Homeland Security Today.

Editor's bio:

David Silverberg, Editor, is a respected Washington writer and editor with experience in defense, technology, congressional affairs and publication management. He helped conceive and launch Homeland Security Today in May 2004. In 2009 he was the first-ever recipient of the "Journalism That Matters" award from the American Society of Business Publication Editors.

David Silverberg has reported for Defense News, where he covered international trade and technology issues, and Armed Forces Journal, where he was editor-at-large. In 1998 he conceived, helped launch and edited the magazine Military Information Technology . He also served as executive editor of Military Training Technology and Missiles & Munitions. From 1999 to 2002 he served as managing editor of the weekly newspaper The Hill, covering Congress. During that time, he also authored the book Congress for Dummies (October, 2002), part of the popular "Dummies" book series, as a comprehensive and accessible guide to the US Congress. His writing has appeared in a variety of publications from the popular to the academic, including The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Silverberg also has appeared on numerous TV and radio talk shows.





There is serious money to be made in the security-industrial complex. The TSA's 2011 budget is pegged at $8.2 billion dollars. The company making the scanners just received a $2.8 million order.





The Show Of Force Farce™ in Atlanta just recently was only the beginning.

You always have to follow the money trail. I can only imagine how many of our congressman have their hand in the cookie jar, or should I say cash register.

 

[padawans]

OK I would like to see some statistics on how many people are choosing NOT to visit Disney because of the airport screening machines. The numbers (which we know don't exist anywhere to check) would be so infinitesimal it wouldn't even be a blip to Disney's bottom line. There is a hugely exaggerated sense of how many people this matters enough to, to cancel their trips.

I think you should do some more research on how many people this matters too. I agree it won't affect disney, but I don't think this will go quietly into the night like you suggest.

 

[padawans]

AFAIK there are no fully body scans at train stations or bus terminals.

Not yet.

 

[padawans]

Enjoy it. I'll choose to opt out and continue on my way.

I'm with you I could happily spend every vacation on the west side of the country if I have to and not fly. For me its not about being seen naked. It's about the constitution. I feel that this is just a stepping stone to worse things. I don't know if most people really realize how are constitution is being trampled on and how much power we have given the government. I think they are about to find out over the next few years. Medal detectors have worked just fine since 911. There are other ways to improve security at airports than to infringe upon our privacy and our constitutional rights.

 

[kaytieeldr]

If it becomes old hat and boring to the screeners and there is no one to monitor them as they "work," how long will it take for them to get sloppy on the job. They can't miss a red light on a WTMD.

Apparently maxiesmom wasn't 100% clear. The "novelty" of seeing image after image after image after image after image after image after image ad infinitum of passengers would wear off really fast, whereas the actual point of the scans - to view potential banned items hidden on the person - would be on what the person assigned to view the images would be concentrating.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Come on, do better than that . . . one way glass keeps the screener from seeing us and it's a simple matter of positioning the monitor to hide the image from view of those outside the booth.

Is that genuinely reasonable working conditions? Would YOU want to work under those conditions - effectively, like a zoo creature? Worse, really - knowing people could observe you any time they want, without you having the same opportunity? At least at the zoo, the animals can see us while we watch them.

It wouldn't matter whether the employees viewing the monitors volunteered for the position or were assigned to it (and the latter is a more equitable solution). To work all day in the equivalent of a police interrogation room with potentially thousands of people looking at you every day? Makes zero sense to me.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Aren't you uncomfortable with the thought that the screener could be sitting there joking with another screener about some part of you that is on their screen? They ain't always discreet or professional!

From http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local-beat/TSA-Fracas-After-Body-Scanner-Reveals-TMI-92971929.html

Well, first, that's not a typical scan. That was a training session. Second, the typical scanee will be unknown to and unidentifiable by the person viewing the image. And finally, that was a blatant case of workplace harassment.

I agree with vicki c and maxiesmom, by the way. Let 'em laugh. It's not as if I'm a size six clothed but present a size eighteen scanned image (and all the folds and bulges that go with the latter). While it's rude and ignorant to make jokes at anyone's expense, if the agents want to laugh at my scanned image, go for it. I'm not sensitive. I just want my vacation!

 

[Wimpie]

Well, first, that's not a typical scan. That was a training session. Second, the typical scanee will be unknown to and unidentifiable by the person viewing the image. And finally, that was a blatant case of workplace harassment.

Beyond privacy - these are X-RAYS! Of unknown effects. Of unknown dose.
Google "Dont Scan us"

Then tell me how happy you are to scan yourself or your kids.

 

[padawans]

Sorry, no. The TSA has set up operations at Greyhound terminals, train stations and recently on an Interstate just outside of Atlanta. The TSA has also been trying to encroach on General Aviation (privately owned aircraft):

Personal Liberties — For the first time, the TSA’s regulatory activities would be extended to personal GA aircraft, historic and vintage aircraft, and operators, passengers, and pilots flying for personal and business use. As such, the LASP is a radical departure from anything the TSA has enacted to date. It would, in effect, require governmental review and authority before you could operate your own personal vehicle.

And it would require separate review and authority for every single flight that included passengers. Nothing like the LASP has been imposed on cars, trucks, boats, or any other privately owned, privately operated vehicles. The TSA’s proposal raises serious constitutional questions about personal liberty, privacy, and freedom of movement.

The above is from the EAA, one of the largest General Aviation advocacy groups in the nation, and the bolded words are theirs. PM me if you would like a link, as I cannot post links in this forum just yet.





TSA screeners are not required to have a high school diploma.






The machines do not see tattoos, but an undershirt with a message in duct tape may work. Of course, the best option is to simply opt-out. See the DontScan link in my sig for more info.






Are you not aware of the Whisper Radios that will link the booth operators to their colleagues out at the checkpoint? They are not as isolated as you imply.

Thats scary to think that were putting our security in the hands of people that don't have a high school diploma. I hope most of them do. I mean it's not that hard to graduate high school. Wow I'm speechless on this. I had no idea.

 

[CPT Tripss]

Is that genuinely reasonable working conditions? Would YOU want to work under those conditions - effectively, like a zoo creature? Worse, really - knowing people could observe you any time they want, without you having the same opportunity? At least at the zoo, the animals can see us while we watch them.

It wouldn't matter whether the employees viewing the monitors volunteered for the position or were assigned to it (and the latter is a more equitable solution). To work all day in the equivalent of a police interrogation room with potentially thousands of people looking at you every day? Makes zero sense to me.

Absolutely . . . the TSA employees that view the carryon xrays work under similar conditiions. It seems to help keep them on task and behaving appropriately. As long as the employee knows that the public can observe her, where's the problem? If the employee has "nothing to hide," what's wrong with transparancy?

The whole idea of hidden government observers of free people who have committed no crime strikes me as a police state tactic.

 

[disfan07]

Seriously, I have been more exposed while undergoing surgery. And you're not even awake during that. God only knows what could go on during that

In all seriousness...really??? You guys consider these to be the equivilent of nude pictures??

So on December 21st, I may be walking through one of these body scanners and on December 22nd, I will be undergoing surgery again where everything will be blatanly visible to the doctors, nurses, techs, etc who are in the operating room adn they will actually know the person who it all belongs to....hmmm.

Believe me, I would rather have this than having the 3 VERY cute male nurses who were prepping me for my EP study....that's much more embarassing

 

[CPT Tripss]

Seriously, I have been more exposed while undergoing surgery. And you're not even awake during that. God only knows what could go on during that

In all seriousness...really??? You guys consider these to be the equivilent of nude pictures??

So on December 21st, I may be walking through one of these body scanners and on December 22nd, I will be undergoing surgery again where everything will be blatanly visible to the doctors, nurses, techs, etc who are in the operating room adn they will actually know the person who it all belongs to....hmmm.

Believe me, I would rather have this than having the 3 VERY cute male nurses who were prepping me for my EP study....that's much more embarassing

And fortunately for you, the team providing your medical care consisted of highly trained medical professionals of your choosing in the setting of your choosing. I'll bet you had the procedure explained to you in sufficient detail for you to provide informed consent too. Probably in the course of things you were also offered alternate treatment options and picked the one which you preferred.

Have you experienced anyone involved in your medical care telling you that you had to submit to whatever tests and procedure they decided on, that it wasn't open for discussion and that if you wouldn't agree to these conditions you would get no care? This kind scenario is what we are up against with TSA and the new procedures . . . and it seems that a bunch of people on this board just think it's just peachy keen. Wake up.

 

[maxiesmom]

Have you experienced anyone involved in your medical care telling you that you had to submit to whatever tests and procedure they decided on, that it wasn't open for discussion and that if you wouldn't agree to these conditions you would get no care? This kind scenario is what we are up against with TSA and the new procedures . . . and it seems that a bunch of people on this board just think it's just peachy keen. Wake up.

You keep forgetting that there are other ways to get to where you want to go, in most cases, besides an airplane. They may not be the most convenient options, but they are there. So to make your story equal, you would have to say the one doctor won't discuss treatment with you, but the one a few hours away will. No one has said that you either must travel by air and be screened, or stay home.

It is all about what you choose to do, and if you feel upset enough about the new screening that you will seek an alternate way to travel. Some people may be that upset, some may not. Neither choice is wrong.

 

[deegack]

Seriously, I have been more exposed while undergoing surgery. And you're not even awake during that. God only knows what could go on during that

In all seriousness...really??? You guys consider these to be the equivilent of nude pictures??

So on December 21st, I may be walking through one of these body scanners and on December 22nd, I will be undergoing surgery again where everything will be blatanly visible to the doctors, nurses, techs, etc who are in the operating room adn they will actually know the person who it all belongs to....hmmm.

Believe me, I would rather have this than having the 3 VERY cute male nurses who were prepping me for my EP study....that's much more embarassing

Lets see, a medical team headed by a doctor who has at least 12 years of medical training and consisting of medical professionals most of whom have college degrees in a medical field but at a minimum a high school diploma and additional training vs non medical professions who may or may not have graduated from high school and have no medical training headed by an agency who likes to change the rules because it can - yeah that's the same.

You know, even the Soviet Union only required passes to travel around the country. Maybe we should just all go that route. Apply to the gov't for a pass to travel that way the TSA will know exactly who is traveling, when and why. Whats a little inconvenience and invasion of privacy. (btw insert my sarcastic voice here)

 

[deegack]

You keep forgetting that there are other ways to get to where you want to go, in most cases, besides an airplane. They may not be the most convenient options, but they are there. So to make your story equal, you would have to say the one doctor won't discuss treatment with you, but the one a few hours away will. No one has said that you either must travel by air and be screened, or stay home.

It is all about what you choose to do, and if you feel upset enough about the new screening that you will seek an alternate way to travel. Some people may be that upset, some may not. Neither choice is wrong.

But I shouldn't have to. That is what is comes down to. I have a constitutional right to privacy. (Read the 9th Amendment - powers not enumerated to the gov't are retained by the people. This has been interpreted by the USSC to include a right to privacy). I should not have to get naked (virtual or not) for anyone in order to travel.
Other countries laugh at us because how paranoid the TSA is. We are the only country that has to take off our shoes to travel. Australia, Germany, France, UK, they all seem to be pretty secure and their planes aren't falling out of the sky.

 

[disfan07]

Than dont fly! You have that choice. No one is forcing you onto the plane. You have the option of pat down as well. (Which I have had before...it's not that bad...people make it seem so much worse than it really is)

No one is forcing you. That's what kills me about this argument. People are saying that they are being forced to do this. No one is forcing anyone. You do have a choice. You just dont liek the choice.

 

[vicki_c]

Beyond privacy - these are X-RAYS! Of unknown effects. Of unknown dose.
Google "Dont Scan us"

Then tell me how happy you are to scan yourself or your kids.

Umm ...hello N965JV? Making up new identities now?

 

[goofy4tink]

Umm ...hello N965JV? Making up new identities now?

Seems to be a lot of that going on here in the past few days.

 

[perdidobay]

The saddest thing about that letter is the proof that the nutjob who wrote it has reproduced.


Want to avoid radiation? Then don't get on a plane, you are exposed to radiation while flying at altitude.

And, don't live or work in a building made of marble, brick or concrete or have a kitchen counter made of marble... don't watch tv, have a smoke detector, eat bananas, live under a rock, etc etc, as they all emit varing degrees of radiation.

Compute your personal radiation exposure here...
http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/calculator.html

 

[kaytieeldr]

Absolutely . . . the TSA employees that view the carryon xrays work under similar conditiions. It seems to help keep them on task and behaving appropriately. As long as the employee knows that the public can observe her, where's the problem? If the employee has "nothing to hide," what's wrong with transparancy?

The whole idea of hidden government observers of free people who have committed no crime strikes me as a police state tactic.

They do? In rooms with one-way mirrors, where the general public can stare at them working, freely and for no good purpose or, any time? WHY would or should you or I or anyone be able to stare at someone viewing luggage xrays??? That - along with being able to watch someone viewing body scans when they can't also see the persons watching them is entirely unreasonable and unnecessary.

It's one thing for the employer to be able to view the employee working - my employer does that constantly, in a variety of ways, and we're aware of them. I have no problem with TSA personnel watching scans in a WINDOWED room. But where they can be spied upon by the general public without reciprocity? Nope.