Comment submitted (finally!)

Here is the comment that I just submitted to the feds (better late than never!). (Disclaimer: It's not my finest work.):

I would like to direct my comments for Docket No. TSA-2013-0004 towards two areas of the AIT rule. First, I object on privacy grounds, and, second, I object on safety grounds to the implementation of AIT screening. My recommendation is that the AIT screening program be stopped immediately.

In part IB of the NPRM (Summary of Major Provisions), it says, “AIT currently provides the best available opportunity to detect non-metallic anomalies concealed under clothing without touching the passenger…” followed by, “TSA implemented stringent safeguards to protect the privacy of passengers undergoing AIT screening when AIT units were initially deployed and enhanced privacy further by upgrading it millimeter wave AIT units with ATR software.” As a modest woman who also chooses to raise her children to be modest, I strongly feel that these two statements are contradictory and can not be reconciled. If you are viewing anything under my clothing, or the clothing of my daughter or son, then you are not protecting my privacy. It does not matter to me that the area under my clothing is not seen directly with the naked eye of an individual that I can see, or if a machine is viewing the area under my clothing and transmitting that image either to an individual in another room or to a software program that interprets the image.

This goes to a very fundamental aspect of humanity and, in particular, to a prevalent strain of modesty in America culture bridging across people of various faiths, ethnicities, and backgrounds. Humans wear clothes not only for decorative reasons, but also, and, in some cases, especially, in order to be modest. Anything under the clothes is intentionally hidden, not intended to be viewed by man or machine without express consent (that is, uncoerced undressing). It is, in practice, impossible to take protect passenger privacy while simultaneously forcibly viewing anything that is under passengers’ clothes.

Letter to the editor: 'a smokescreen to appease the public'

David Levin wrote:

To the Editor:

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) was ordered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to solicit comments from the public about the use of full body scanners at airports.

The scanners have become a critical part of airport security. The order by the U.S. District Court is basically nothing more than a smokescreen to appease the public.

It won’t matter how many people object to the use of these machines that show an image of a person’s naked body. The full body scanners will continued to be used after all is said and done.

David M. Levin
Vineland

Scientists' letter to John Holdren

Dr. Sedat of UCSF, who co-authored the original letter of concern regarding scanner safety last year, has written an in-depth response to the Department of Health and Human Service's (HHS) superficial response to such concerns. I can't agree with Dr. Sedat and his colleagues' final paragraph, in which they offer alternatives to backscatter scanners that are still violations of our rights, but the rest of the letter is excellent. It is very technical, well-researched, and points out the lack of proper conduct on the part of the feds in assessing the safety of the backscatter scanners.

If you've been following the story, you'll know that Johns Hopkins played a role in evaluating these scanners, but the institution has been vociferous in its insistence that the study did not evaluate the safety of the scanners. Not to be dissuaded, HHS has continued to imply that the Johns Hopkins analysis supports their claim that scanners are safe to use on all people as primary screening at airports. Sedat starts by saying:

There is Still No Rigorous Hard Data For The Safety of X-Ray Airport Passenger Scanners.

...The [Johns Hopkins] document is heavily redacted ... 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. ... There are also [technical] issues ... The data given in the Johns Hopkins report indicate that there must be something wrong.

I've deleted much of the technical points (which are important for context) to make one of Sedat's points clear: This does not in any way, shape, or form follow acceptable standards for scientific research. If the TSA just wanted to bake a birthday cake, it wouldn't be such a big deal. But they are currently shooting ionizing radiation at the general population in airports across the nation without so much as a single peer-reviewed study on the safety of the machines being published. The letter continues:

An open letter to Jason Chaffetz

Rep Jason Chaffetz takes an outspoken position on TSA abuses of Americans’ rights in airports across the nation. In 2009 – long before most Americans knew what a “scanner” was – he introduced legislation to try to block the scanner program due to the alarming lack of research and potential rights abuses. He has likened their “pat-downs” to sexual assault, has oversight of DHS since the GOP won a majority in the House, and, in that role, held a hearing (as editorialized here by Becky Akers). Just today, he issued a statement about the upsetting viral video that shows a 6-year old receiving a custodial search at the New Orleans airport. Because of his apparent interest in these matters, I am writing him this open letter. 

April 13, 2011

Dear Mr Chaffetz,

I am writing to you regarding the serious abuses occurring at the hands of federal employees across the nation: the employees of the TSA. I read your statement and letter to John Pistole regarding the recent incident of a 6-year old, Anna Drexel, being thoroughly searched by a TSA employee. In an interview with Good Morning American, Dr. and Mrs. Drexel looked as if they have been through a living nightmare. They also let us know what happened after the camera stopped rolling: little Anna broke down in tears, confused over what had just happened and why. Of course, her parents could not explain why. They do not understand this themselves, just as you, I and thousands of others who have seen the video fail to see any justification in what happened.

I can only imagine what the Drexels went through, but, as a mother myself, I can relate to their situation. I suffered through months of anxiety prior to our trip to see family for Christmas last year. After purchasing our airline tickets, I learned that scanners had been installed in all of the DC-area airports. As a professor of chemistry, I had serious misgivings about the safety of the scanners for my 1-year old, as well as for me and my husband. As a liberty advocate, I knew that the use of the scanners as primary screening without a warrant or just cause was a serious breach of our rights. As a modest person and mother, I did not wish to have me or my daughter seen naked by a stranger, and view the scanners as an egregious invasion of our privacy. I cried more than once over the prospect of having my daughter molested at the airport during our trip. I pleaded with the airline to reimburse me for the cost of the trip, but only succeeded in getting the fee waived to change our departure airport to Norfolk, VA (yes, I drove four hours to an airport to avoid the scanners). I have been tirelessly publicizing the TSA’s abuses. Suffice it to say, we will be taking the train to California next Christmas, unless, by some miracle, the scanners and pat-downs stop at BWI, DCA, and IAD.

TSA News Roundup

I didn't have time this week to write commentary on each of these pieces. So I'll just include them all here with a brief intro to each.

• A test of the scanners revealed that they were emitting ten times more radiation than expected. But - not to worry - they are sure it is a math error, not an actual error in the scanners. So they'll keep testing them until they get the answer they wanted. I feel safer already!

• Becky Akers had a great column on the TSA dog-training program. She really hits the nail on the head about why this is creepy.

• Suspicious package closes airport for 7 hours. Need I say more?

• A passionate letter to the editor from a father about his daughter's ordeal with her children at the airport due to inane TSA policies and general airport bullying.

• Sharon Cissna went to Washington. I was not impressed.

• Is PHL the worst airport for TSA excesses? Nope - they're all equally horrible!

• An update on Aaron Tobey - the literate college student who was detained for having the 4th Amendment written on his chest last fall (it couldn't have been because he was only wearing his skivvies, since that's what the scanners see anyway!).

Since you didn't respond, Mr. Pistole, here are my demands

Jon Deniro never heard  back from the head of the TSA, so he has written to Pistole again. Here's an excerpt:

John Pistole, 

It seems you are resolute in your choice to continue your assault on the people of the U.S.A.  You appear steadfast in your desire to violate the rights citizens are guaranteed under the Constitution, and to continue your criminal activities.

I am equally resolute to defend the Constitution and the rights guaranteed to citizens thereunder. 

You are a traitor to the United States of America and I will not treat you as anything more honorable than that. 

I demand that: 

1 - The TSA be immediately disbanded. Airport security immediately revert to the private sector, this being it's natural and lawful domain; 

2 - The TSA website be wiped clean of all propaganda and replaced with a database containing the following for each and every employee, associate, contractor, etc., both present and past, who has ever been associated with your organization in any manner;

A - Each such person's full name (including any and all aliases), social security number, home address, telephone number, and spouse's same information (if applicable). Also the person's job title(s) and location(s) worked;

B - A clearly legible photo of a government issued photo ID card showing the person's name and photograph;

C - Two completely nude photographs of the person, one frontal, one rear view, full length and positioned in the same pose as used in your backscatter machines;

D -  A notarized affidavit signed and fingerprinted by the person stating that they now and forever waive all their rights as an American citizen. As it has been irrefutably evidenced that TSA personnel do not believe in the protections of our laws, and the Constitution in particular, they can voice no objection to affirming that they have no rights. The primary purpose of this being so that any person on U.S. soil, irrespective of citizenship, may, without fear of legal repercussions, grope, fondle, sexually assault, digitally rape, verbally and/or physically abuse, and in various ways humiliate TSA personnel, as well as confiscate personal property of those TSA personnel, as dictated only by their whim and fancy;   

Read the rest

John Pistole: Enemy of the Constitution

Jon Deniro forwarded me the following letter that he sent to John Pistole at TSA headquarters on December 16th.

John Pistole,

I have never in my life written to any member or employee of the US government before today. Your recent actions and arrogant refusal to 1) act in accord within the framework of the Constitutional restraint on governmental invasion of the Peoples' rights and/or 2) abide by the wishes of the American people have forced me to get involved. I swore a solemn oath, many years ago, and reaffirmed it on more than one occasion to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America from all enemies, foreign and domestic." You sir, are an enemy of the Constitution -- as are all employees of the TSA who stand with you or otherwise acquiesce to your instructions.

The very fact that you and other members of the TSA have been caught outright lying to the American public is irrefutable proof that your actions are criminal, immoral, unconstitutional, and inherently anti-American. Misleading and outright lying to the public to instill fear so that you may advance your agenda is by definition an act of terrorism. If your actions were in any way justifiable, you would not need dishonesty to gain submission from the masses.

US Air: pretending I'm a satisfied customer

I recently received these two letters from US Air. So, they've now responded to my third and fourth letters, but, as you can see, they have ignored my request for further accommodations for my trip.

In the meantime, my roundabout trip to avoid the scanners was extremely inconvenient. My husband says the millimeter wave scanners were indeed in use at BWI, but he, himself, avoided a scan or custody search.

No longer a frequent flyer

Kishin Thadani shares his letter to Continental airlines:

December 11, 2010

RE: Your loyal customer (OnePass member ########) & the T.S.A.

HEAD OF CUSTOMER CARE

Continental Airlines, Inc.

900 Grand Plaza Drive NHCCR

Houston, TX 77067-4323

Dear Sir or Madam:

I am writing to confide in you about a decision that I have made.  You see, I have decided to stop flying.  My last flight was in August 2010 with Continental Airlines and I do not have any intentions of flying again in the foreseeable future.  In fact, I recently changed my travel plans and I have decided to drive over 1,200 miles to attend my best friend's wedding in Florida rather than to hop on a direct three hour flight.  As I am sure that you are aware, Newark Airport (EWR) is a Continental Airlines hub and you have daily non-stop service to several airports in south Florida.  You may then be curious as to what would compel someone like me to forego the time convenience and cost effectiveness of a Continental Airlines flight and instead make such a person opt for an 18 hour long drive.

Well, allow me to expound on the reasoning behind my decision as well as that of others who share my feelings.

The outstanding reason for my decision can be attributed to the Department of Homeland Security's Transportation Security Administration, or simply the TSA.  Specifically, it is the TSA's policies, procedures, and practices that are dissuading me from ever wanting to fly again.  Ever since the TSA introduced what they call "Advanced Imaging Technology" x-ray machines (a.k.a. the naked body scanners) in the airports, there has been a rightful outrage over their use and abuse. 

Crossing paths with US Air

I just wanted to post this letter from United US Air (below). It is apparently a response to my third letter, not my most recent letter. However, Ms. Kerman did not address my concerns at all, and seems to be responding to what I wrote in my second letter. Very confusing, isn't it? The delay between letters this time is much longer, so I will wait longer this time to hear their response to my most recent letter.

Oh, and no word from Orbitz, yet.

Southwest's response changes a little

Southwest responded to JC Warren's message. Note that it's a little different from earlier responses.

Dear Jc,
Thank you for contacting us in regard to the recent changes to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screening procedures.  Without a doubt, we fully acknowledge how vital your feedback is to our operation, and can assure you that your dissatisfaction has been taken to heart.
Although we do not have any direct influence over these Federal directives, we have made very careful notations of your feedback which will be summarized and indexed for additional review by our Senior Leaders.

If you would like to share your concerns directly with the TSA, please utilize the hyperlink below:
https://contact.tsa.dhs.gov/DynaForm.aspx?FormID=10

We wish you all the best over the coming months, and sincerely hope to have an opportunity to welcome you on board in the near future.

Sincerely, Charity, Southwest Airlines

The file reference number for your e-mail is 1126815811.

Which side will Orbitz and US Air choose?

Will these companies stay on the side of those who are wrong - violating privacy and basic human rights - or the side of the angels, so to speak?

Orbitz Scanner Letter 3

Read the letter to US Air, as well:

Update on US Air and Orbitz

I have received no response to my letters last week. Does this mean that they have no intention of trying to retain me as a customer?

I've used Orbitz almost exclusively for my travel needs for the last 10 years. Good-bye, Orbitz!

As a bi-coastal family, I've flown cross-country at least twice a year for these last 10 years. The airport that I fly into is served only by US Air and United, although I've been known to frequent Southwest and Jet Blue in the past. So far, I've been nonplussed by responses from all of these carriers.

Because I made a promise to my husband's family that they would get to spend Christmas with my daughter this year, I will be making every effort to get her to California. I truly hope that I am not forced to make a decision between our privacy and our vacation. But I can see no reason to continue to support companies that show such little disregard for the my family's fundamental rights.

Write your airports, too!

Steve Smith writes:

People are calling the airlines to register their complaints about the peeping and the groping. They should also call their local airport authority. These are (I suppose) quasi-governmental bodies, but their first job is to keep people flying through their airport.

In my case, I know that my local airport is on the TSA list of airports with the full-body scanners. However, I called the authority's number anyway and left this message (it being before business hours), with my name and phone and a request that someone get back to me:

"Hi, this is Steve Smith. I live in Chapel Hill and my number is _________ .  I understand that RDU [Raleigh-Durham airport] has those full-body scanners. Please let me know for sure, as I don't want to fly from there if you do.  Also, do you happen to know if, say, the Greensboro airport [about 50 miles distant] has them yet? I might fly from there instead. Thanks."

When/if someone calls me back and confirms that RDU does have the porno-tron scanners, I will strongly suggest that they opt out of the TSA's "services" if they don't wish to lose customers like me.

I fully support this. See also Tom DiLorenzo's open letter to Birmingham and Atlanta airport administrators.

Senator Leahy: We'll be watching

Kevin McElroy forwarded Sen Leahy's response. For those who feel the political route will be more effective, here's what you can expect:

Dear Mr. McElroy:

Thank you for contacting me about the use of body scanners in airports and new security screening procedures.  I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue, and understand your concerns.

After September 11, 2001, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) implemented a pilot program to test whole-body scanners in airports before they were put into widespread use.  In October 2009, the TSA ordered 150 whole-body scanners to be deployed in airports across the nation, and in March 2010, the TSA purchased an additional 450 scanners that are currently being deployed nationwide.  In the wake of this deployment, many Americans have expressed concerns over personal privacy as the whole-body scanners are used to screen passengers, and the security of those captured images.

Delta brushes off Glenn Jacobs

Glenn Jacobs wrote the following message to Delta regarding his travel plans, and got the standard response (scroll down to see their response):

I am writing to express my concern over the TSA's body
scanners and new pat down protocols. Since the creation of the TSA, I
have avoided flying whenever possible. Unfortunately, due to the nature
of my business, this is not often possible. However, the TSA has now
gone beyond the pale. While I must still fly for business, I will not
allow my family to be subjected to this sort of treatment, so flying for
pleasure is out. In addition, I am actively encouraging everyone I know
to avoid flying as much as possible. Delta runs a great business, and I
have always felt like a valued customer when on flying on it. However,
there are many frequent travelers who feel the same way that I do. The
TSA has not only failed to make us safer, it has become the bane of our
traveling experience.

Delta's response:

US Air, will you protect your pregnant customers?

Elliott McElroy wrote to US Air earlier this week about her upcoming Thanksgiving travel. She has not heard from them, yet, and has asked me to post her letter here:

November 15, 2010

US Airways
ATTN: Customer Relations
4000 E Sky Harbor Blvd
Phoenix, AZ 85034

Dear Sir or Madam:

I’m writing to express my concerns about the newly implemented security procedures at airports around the country, and how my family intends to respond to them.

I recently purchased roundtrip airplane tickets for myself and my husband to travel between Manchester-Boston Regional Airport and Philadelphia International Airport before and after the Thanksgiving holiday. My online check-in number is XXXXXX and the tickets were purchased through www.travelocity.com. At the time of purchasing the tickets, I was not made aware that PHL would be using AIT scanners. 

My husband and I object to submitting ourselves through the scanning technology. I am not convinced of its safety, nor am I convinced that our privacy will be respected. Simply because the TSA website reports that the scanning technology will pose no threat to my health does not mean that I will blindly believe the information presented, especially in light of the fact that I will be 18 weeks pregnant at the time of planned travel.

Goodbye delicious peanuts

K Moon Howe writes to Southwest (and preempts their cookie-cutter response, so this will be interesting):

Dear Southwest,

I, along with my entire family, have been loyal customers for the past 20 years.  I have enjoyed my passenger experiences and appreciated your efficiency, accessibility, and customer service.

It is with regret that I must say goodbye, unless and until the checkpoint procedures are greatly revised and improved.  I am well aware that Southwest does not determine procedure; TSA does.  Please do not direct me to the TSA website, as I have already gone through that channel.  My purpose in sending this note to you is to let you know I valued your company and the service you provided.  I am disappointed that I cannot continue to offer you my patronage, as  I cannot in good conscience let my minor child bee seen virtual-reality nude, and if an adult traumatizes her via inappropriate touching I will be broke anyway after the legal penalties that will be the result of me beating the crap out of them.

Please use your position as a customer service-oriented, successful carrier to stand up for your loyal customers.

Oh yeah, thanks for all the peanuts and Coca-Cola too.

Sincerly,
K Moon Howe
see Rapid Rewards # above

Hawaiian Airlines responds

Ryan Marshall writes: "Finally got a response from Hawaiian Airlines. Your basic cookie-cutter response... disappointing."

November 18, 2010

Mr. Ryan Marshall
RE:     Contact Ref. #1011297668

Dear Mr. Marshall:

This is in response to your email received by our office on November 12,
2010.

We understand you are disappointed with the new security measures by the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA).  Although we understand your
concern, regretfully, any issues dealing with security at the airports are
referred directly to TSA.  Please visit their website at www.tsa.gov
<http://www.tsa.gov> to file your complaint directly with them.

What part of "Goodbye" didn't you understand, Jet Blue?

Marilyn Masiker received her form-letter response from Jet Blue, reprinted below. Keep scrolling to read her affirmation of her rights, and what she expects Jet Blue to do about it.

Hello Marilyn,

Thank you for contacting JetBlue Airways. We appreciate you taking the time to write in to
us and understand your concerns with changes to the TSA security process in airports. Your
comments will be passed along to our Leadership.

The Transportation Security Administration is responsible for all facets of security. The TSA
organization is government run and is responsible for ensuring that no dangerous items are
brought into the main airport waiting area, or onboard the aircraft. JetBlue does not employ any
persons that work for the TSA.